The Trinity (Fathers of the Church Patristic Series) 0813213215, 9780813213217

Table of contents :
INTRODUCTION
THE TRINITY
Book 1
Book 2
Book 3
Book 4
Book 5
Book 6
Book 7
Book 8
Book 9
Book 10
Book 11
Book 12
INDEX

Citation preview

THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH A NEW TRANSLATION VOLUME 25

THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH A NEW TRANSLATION

Roy

JOSEPH DEFERRARI

Editorial Director Emeritus

EDITORIAL BOARD

J.

BERNARD M. PEEBLES

PAUL

The Catholic University of America Editorial Director

The Catholic University of Amerir:a Managing Editor

ROBERT P. RUSSELL, O.S.A.

THOMAS P. HALTON

Villanova University

The Catholic University of A lI1l'rica

MARTIN R. P. MCGUIRE

WILLIAM R. TONGUE

The Catholic University of America

The Catholic University of America

HERMIGILD DRESSLER, O.F.M.

SR. M. JOSEPHINE BRENNAN, I.H.M.

The Catholic University of America

Marywood College

MSGR. JAMES A. MAGNER

REDMOND A. BURKE, C.S.V.

The Catholic University of America

The Catholic University of America

MORIN

SAINT HILARY OF POITIERS THE TRINITY Translated by STEPHEN McKENNA, C.SS.R. The Catholic University of Puerto Rico Ponce, Puerto Rico

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS Washington, D.C. 20017

IMPRIMI POTEST:

VERY REV. JOHN SEPHTON C.SS.R.

Provincial, Baltimore Province

NIHIL OBSTAT:

JOHN M. A. FEARNS, S.T.D.

Censor Librorum

IMPRIMATUR:

III FRANCIS CARDINAL SPELLMAN Archbishop of New York

September 24, 1954

Library of Congress Catalog No.: 67·28585 © Copyright 1954 by

ATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS, INC. Reprinted with corrections 1968

All rights reserved First paperback reprint 2002 ISBN 0·8132·1321·5

INTRODUCTION

~

T'

HILARY WAS BORN, probably in the year 315, at Poitiers in Aquitaine. 1 It is uncertain whether or not his family was Christian. Though the saint does not settle the question by an explicit statement, the better opinion seems to be that he was a pagan and has described the manner of his conversion in the opening chapters of his work on the Trinity. Additional confirmation for this view is that he was not baptized until he was an adult. 2 His edifying life as a Catholic caused him to be chosen as Bishop of Poitiers in 353 or 354. He entered the episcopate at a critical moment. Constant I, Emperor of the Roman Empire in the West, had been murdered in 350, and his brother, Constantius II, now became the sole ruler of the whole Empire. But it was not until 353 that the latter's authority was universally recognized and the rebellion against him had come to an end. While Constans had been a staunch supporter of the Catholics, the sympathies of Constantius were clearly with the Arian party in the Church. He was determined to force his religious opinions upon the bishops of the West as well as of those in the East. His first step was to summon the prelates of Western Europe to councils at ArIes 1 For an account of St. Hilary's life cf. G. Girard. Saint Hilaire (Paris 1902; Angers 1905); J. Reinkens. Hilarius von Poitiers (Schaffhausen 186-1) ; X. Le Dachelet. 'Hilaire (Saint). eveque de Poitiers,' DACL VI. cols. 21188-2462. 2 De Trinitate 6.21.

v

vi

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

and Milan in 355 and to demand that they repudiate St. Athanasius, who had become the touchstone of orthodoxy, and the living symbol of the Council of Nicaea and of its definition of the Verbum as 'consubstantial with the Father.' With only a few exceptions, the bishops at these councils acceded t.o the emperor's wishes. St. Hilary, who does not seem to have been present at either ArIes or Milan, was summoned to a meeting at Beziers. He refused absolutely to condemn St. Athanasius and was banished to Phrygia in 356. His exile was not too severe, for he was able to keep in touch with his flock in Poi tiers and with the hierarchy of Gaul by means of letters. And in a sense his enforced stay in the East was to be a blessing in disguise. Incredible as it may seem, St. Hilary tells us that up to 355 he had not even heard of the term 'homoousion' that the Council of Nicaea had officially promulgated in 325. 3 But now he obtained first-hand information about the controversies regarding the divinity of Christ that had raged in the Eastern Church since the days of Paul of Samosata a century before. He became well informed about the heresy of Arius and the answers that had been given by the Catholic apologists. He likewise took an active part in encouraging the prelates to resist the Arian tendencies that were so evident among the members of the imperial court and among so many of the bishops. Then, in 360, after a period of four years, the exile of St. Hilary suddenly ended. According to Sulpicius Severus, 4 the reason for this sudden change of policy was that the emperor regarded the saint as 'a sower of discord and a disturber of the Orient.' The death of Constantius soon afterwards and the short and troubled reign of Julian the Apostate gave the Church a breathing spell. Upon his return home, St. Hilary did not confine his activity to his own diocese, but went about Gaul 3 De synodis n. 91. 4 Chronica 2.45.4.

INTRODUCTION

vii

and Italy trying to heal the wounds caused by the antiCatholic policy of Constantius. On the whole he was successful, although he failed in one of his principal objectives, to have Auxentius, the Arian bishop of Milan, removed from office. The saint, who had accomplished so much for the Church in so short a time, died either in 367 or 368. Just as Boethius was later to write his best known work, De consolatione philosophiae, while in prison, so St. Hilary composed his masterpiece, De Trinitate, during his exile in Phrygia. This is clear from his own words: 'Although in exile we shall speak through these books, and the word of God, which cannot be bound, shall move about in freedom.'5 The work, therefore, was completed during the years 356-360. It may even be that the first three of the twelve books of De Trinitate were finished before his .exile even began. At least the saint informs us that there was a comparatively long delay between the writing of them and the beginning of the fourth book. 6 One important reason in favor of this opinion is that he does not mention the word 'homoousion,' even though it would have fitted in very appropriately with the subject-matter of the first three books, and, as we have already noted, he did not learn of this term until the year 355. During the years 356-360, when De Trinitate was written, the Anomoeans, as the Arians were now called, attained their greatest influence. Supported by the emperor, they were able to bend the bishops to their will, and to banish those, like St. Athanasius and St. Hilary, who refused to submit. In 359, at the Councils of Seleucia and Rimini, they forced the prelates to declare that the Verbum was 'like the Father in all things,' a formula of faith that not only repudiated the Council of Nicaea, but would inevitably lead to a denial of Christ's divinity. St. Hilary was not exaggerating when he wrote: 'Through5 De Trinitate 10.4. 6 Ibid. 4.1.

viii

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

out almost all the provinces of the Roman Empire many churches have become infected with this deadly doctrine.' 1 As far as we know, no one requested St. Hilary to write De Trinitate. He did so because he was vividly conscious of the fact that his vocation and office of bishop obliged him to preach the Gospel. 8 Through these books he would make known the true teaching of the Church about this most sacred mystery to his fellow Catholics of Western Europe, and expose the hypocrisy of the heretics in appealing to Scripture to defend their false doctrine, and in pretending to be only concerned with maintaining the oneness of God when they denied the divinity of Christ. It was his hope that the people who had fallen into heresy through ignorance rather than through malice would return to the Catholic Church, and, as he picturesquely described it, 'might soar aloft in freedom and security from the deadly food by which birds are wont to be enticed into the trap.'9 The main enemies against whom he wrote were the Arians. But the name of Arius appears only twice in this work, and there is but one explicit mention of this heresiarch's followers. He usually designates them as 'the new teachers of Christ,' 'the heretics of the present day,' 'the new apostolate of AntiChrist.' His detestation of their false teaching is clearly apparent from the adjectives which he is constantly applying to it: 'impious,' 'irreverent,' 'blasphemous.' It is true that he also replies to the objections that Valentinian, Hieracas, Ebion, and others had brought against the Trinity in the earlier centuries. He takes particular care to refuse Sabellius, who spoke of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but considered them as merely three different names for one and the same divine Person. But St. Hilary refutes these men only in order to 7 Ibid. 6.1. 8 Ibid. 6.2.

9 Ibid.

INTRODUCTION

IX

combat the Arians more effectively. One of the favorite accusations of the latter was that the Catholic doctrine about the divinity of the Verbum, as it had been defined by the Council of Nicaea, was merely a revival under a different form of errors that had long since been condemned. In his De synodis, which he also wrote during his exile, St. Hilary gives an account of the machinations of the Arians and the Semi-Arians, and the various formulas of faith which they had drawn Up.l0 But he does not discuss the historical aspects of Arianism in De Trinitate. Here, his main concern is with theological considerations. The root of Arius' errors was that 'he conceived the eternal, simple, immutable God as essentially unbegotten, so that all communication of God's substance by way of generation must imply a contradiction in terms.'ll It is only natural, therefore, that the central idea of all twelve Books of The Trinity is the being or essence of God. His previous training had to a certain extent prepared him for this difficult task. As he tells us, it was God's eternal self-existence, which He had revealed to Moses in the words 'I AM WHO AM' that had not only filled him with admiration, but also marked a turning point in his life. 12 God was not, as the Arians described Him, a Person living alone in solitary grandeur. With Him was the Son. The latter was not a creature, not a cutting off, an emanation, a separation, or a division of the nature of God. He was the true Son of God, born of Him by an eternal generation. The Father, who had all, gave to the Son who received all. It is true that St. Hilary applies the words of our Saviour, 'The Father is greater than I,' to the divine nature of Christ. 13 But it would be wrong to conclude from this that he regarded Christ as 10 11 12 15

PL 10.471-475. B_ Otten. A Manual of the History of Dogmas I (St. Louis 1917) 254. De Trinitate 1.5. Ibid. 9.4.

x

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

an inferior God. He meant to indicate that the Father is the principle or source from which the Son derives His eternal origin. There is hardly a chapter of this work where the true equality between the Father and the Son is not emphasized. From the title of this work we might expect that the Holy Spirit would receive equal treatment with the Father and the Son, as in textbooks of dogmatic theology. But this is not the case. The person and nature of the Holy Spirit are not treated at length for the simple reason that St. Hilary was concerned, as were the Arians, with the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. Hilary has been accused of denying the true divinity of the Holy Spirit because he never states explicitly that the Holy Spirit is God. But, as will be shown in the text, the saint refers in so many other different ways to the true divinity of the third Person of the Trinity that his perfect orthodoxy on this subject cannot be reasonably denied. Similarly, the saint was more interested in proving that the divine nature of Christ was consubstantial with that of His heavenly Father than in bringing out that His human nature was consubstantial with ours. Since the relationship between the divine and human natures in Christ was to be studied systematically only after his death, we cannot expect to find the same precision of thought in his Christological as in his Trinitarian doctrine. We can say, however, that St. Hilary's writings are an anticipation of the definitions of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, for he clearly holds the reality of the one divine Person in Christ as well as of His divine and human natures. He speaks of Christ having a 'heavenly' body,14 but from the context it is evident that he is referring to the fact that Christ's body was not conceived according to the ordinary laws of human generation, and that it was intimately united with a divine Person. A more serious objection is that St. H I bid. 5.18.

INTRODUCTION

xi

Hilary seems to believe that Christ did not and could not feel sorrow and pain. 15 To those who would later bring up this objection St. Thomas Aquinas would answer: 'In all these and similar words Hilary does not intend to exclude the pain, but the necessity of it.'16 But most of the difficulties on this subject will be settled if we remember that the Arians claimed that the Logos did not have a rational soul and therefore did not endure the emotions and sufferings that are attributed to Him in the PassionY In his eagerness to show that pain and suffering were not incompatible with Christ's divine dignity, he teaches that, while He felt organic pain, such as hunger, thirst, bodily sufferings, these did not arouse within Him the interior sentiments that they do in ordinary mortals. It must be conceded that St. Hilary does not take into sufficient account the state of physical weakness to which the Son of God voluntarily submitted when He assumed our human nature. is It is by no means a coincidence that Arianism arose in the school of Antioch where the pagan philosophy of Greece had taken such deep roots. One of the characteristics of this philosophy was that the human mind was the measure of all things, and that which man could not comprehend was to be rejected as unreasonable. That is why St. Hilary wrote: 'A firm faith rejects the captious and useless questions of philosophy,'19 and why he so often and so vigorously condemns the wisdom of this world as folly in the sight of God. He does not, of course, reject reasoning about the mysteries of God, but he insists that the Ttinity is incomprehensible and must be accepted by faith. Book 3, in fact, aims particularly at showing that only when man has become convinced of the limitations of his knowledge does he begin to understand the 15 16 17 18 19

Ibid. 10.27. Summa Theologica (London 1913) III. Q. 15. art. 5. J. Tixeront. Histoire des dogmes 2 (4th ed.• Paris 1912) 285. X. Le Bachelet. op. cit. 2448. De Trinitate 1.13.

xii

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

things of God. The importance which he ascribed to faith may be one reason· why this work was known to some early writers as De fide. The Arians sought to justify their teachings by an appeal to the Word of God. They quoted both the Old and the New Testament to prove that there is only one Person in God and that, therefore, the Verbum could not possibly be the true God. St. Hilary took up the challenge and showed how they had distorted the true meaning of the Scriptural passages: 'Heresy does not come from Scripture but from the understanding of it; the fault is in the mind not in the words.'20 His main proofs are naturally found in the New Testament, where the Son of God Himself clearly enunciated this truth. But we know from the saint's other writings that the teachings of Christ are foreshadowed in the Old Testament, and hence he finds many indications there of the great mystery of the Trinity. It is interesting to note that his text is sometimes a direct translation from the Septuagint and sometimes from a Latin version that is no longer extant in its entirety. 21 Since the very action of the heretics was a repudiation of the magisterium of the Church, the saint only refers to the teaching authority of the Church in passing. But he does assert very emphatically that the Church is indestructible, and that she contains the remedy against all types of heresy, just as certain medicines can cure all kinds of diseases. 22 At the end of Book 1, when he is about to begin a detailed study of the Trinity, St. Hilary humbly turned to God and begged Him to enlighten his mind so that he might comprehend and express this mysterious teaching correctly. For, as he says, he was about 'to undertake what is unlawful, to scale arduous heights, to speak of the ineffable, and to trespass 20 Ibid. 2.3. 21 J. P. Brisson, Traite des mysteres (Sources chretiennes, ed. H. de Lubac et J. Danielou. Paris 1947) 68·70. 22 De Trinitate 2.22.

INTRODUCTION

xiii

upon forbidden places.'23 An added difficulty, as he realized, was that, while this subject had been treated for so many years by the keenest minds in the Eastern Church, no Latin writer had written a scientific and systematic treatise before him, for Tertullian had only a few references to the Trinity in his Adversus Praxeas. 24 St. Hilary, therefore, was to be a pioneer and had to coin many new words in order to express his thought accurately. Among the neologisms attributed to him are abscissio, incarnatio, innascibilitas, ininitiabilis, supercreo, and consubsisto. He also gave new meanings to words already in current use, as sacramentum, dispensatio, and substitutio. St. Hilary knew, of course, that finite things can never adequately express those that are infinite. On the other hand, he realized that analogies and illustrations from ordinary life were extremely valuable in the understanding of difficult subjects and he does not hesitate to make use of them in this work. For example, the obvious comparison that suggests itself when we hear of God the Father and God the Son is that of parents and their children. While the Arians drew from this similarity the conclusion that Christ could not be eternal, for He must have come after His Father as children come after their parents, St. Hilary applied it in a different sense. Just as a true human nature is transmitted from parents to their children, so a true divine nature is communicated from God the Father to God the Son. Furthermore, like a good teacher he planned to proceed from the unknown to the known, from the more simple to the more difficult teachings about the Trinity. Finally, he co-ordinated and systematized the subject matter, and in Book 1 drew a brief outline of the contents of each book. 23 Ibid. 2.2. 24 F. Cayre, Patrologie et histoire de thtologie I (4th ed. Paris 1945) 236-237.

xiv

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

St. Augustine declared that St. Hilary went out of the Egypt of his false religion and philosophy, adorned with the gold, silver, and costly raiment of his pagan culture. 25 St. Jerome praised him for his elegance of style. 26 The truth of their words is seen more clearly in De Trinitate than in the other writings of St. Hilary. The saint devoted particular care to the composition of this work and had even prayed that he might receive the 'nobility of diction' befitting so exalted a subject. Everywhere he gives evidence of the careful training that he had received in Latin rhetoric. Still, he never strives for mere effect, and in general is much more restrained in the ornaments of speech than the other Christian writers of the fourth and fifth centuries. 27 One of the characteristic features of De Trinitate is the saint's frequent apostrophes. He often interrupts the argumentation in order to plead with the heretics to abandon their errors; or he will turn to God in prayer. He did not regard the question of the Trinity as a mere theological dispute, but as a matter of eternal life and death for each individual. It is not sufficient for salvation to believe that God is the Creator and that Christ performed miracles. We must accept God as the Father and Christ as the Son if we are to be saved. St. Hilary felt that his work on the Trinity resembled a well-graded elevation along which his readers could 'ascend without hardly realizing that they are doing SO.'28 In this he was overoptimistic. Erasmus, one of the early editors of the saint's writings, has called attention to the many needless repetitions of the same thoughts throughout the twelve Books. St. Hilary is also difficult to understand because he uses the same words to convey different meanings and one must often 25 De doctrina christiana 2.40. 26 Commentarium in lsaiam 1.8. 27 Cf. Sister M. Butte!, The Rhetoric of St. Hilary of Poitiers (Washington 1933) 166-171. 28 De Trinitate 1.20.

INTRODUCTION

xv

puzzle over them for a long time before determining their significance in a particular context. His frequent use of involved periods does not make for easy reading, and in many places he compresses his thought in a few words when a longer explanation would clarify his meaning. Finally, the Migne text, which is that of Dom Coustant, a Benedictine scholar of the seventeenth century, needs to be thoroughly revised. There is scarcely a page in which the editor does not call attention to variant readings in the manuscripts. 29 Undoubtedly, many of the obscurities in this work will disappear when De Trinitate has been as critically edited as some of the saint's other writings. Still, this work of St. Hilary is his masterpiece and upon it rests his fame as a theologian. It is generally regarded as one of the finest writings that the Arian controversy produced. Augustine and Leo the Great are among the early writers who praise it, and St. Thomas Aquinas frequently appeals to it when settling disputes about the Trinity. Besides giving to us his own independent thought, he was also the first to bring to the a.tention of the scholars of the Roman Empire in the West the vast theological riches of the Orient. St. Hilary, therefore, is one of the foundation stones upon which later writers would erect a magnificent theological edifice to pay some measure of honor to their triune God. 29 'Leider gehort Hilarius zu den schwerverstandlichen und dunkeln Schriftstellern. Seine Sprache . . . bietet dem Leser so erhebliche Schwierigkeiten dass man am Textverderbnis zu denken geneigt ist' (T. Forster, 'Zur Theologie des Hilarius: Theologische Stuaien und Kritiken 61 [1888] 649) .

xvi

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Editions and Translations: Hilarius Pictaviensis, Opera iuxta edit. monachor. ord. Benedic. et omnes alias inter se collatas, ed. J. P. Migne, Patrologia Latina 9-10 (Paris 1844-45). S. Hilarii episcopi Pictaviensis Tractatus super Psalmos. Recensuit et commentario critico instruxit A. ZingerIe, CSEL 22 (Vienna 1891) . Hilarius Pictaviensis, Opera IV: Tractatus M),steriorum, Liber ad Constantium, Hymni, Fragmenta, Spuria, ed. A. Feder, CSEL 65 (Vienna 1916). Antweiler, A., Des heiligen Bischofs Hilarius von Poitierl :z:wolf Bucher uber die Dreieinigkeit aus dem Lateinischen uberset:z:t und mit Einleitung versehen. Bibliothek der Kirchenviter, Zweite Reihe, Bande V-VI (MUnchen 1933-1934). Brisson, J. P., Hilaire de PoWers. Traite des myst~res (Paris 1947). Watson, E. W., St. Hilary of Poitiers: Select Works Translated, A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church 9 (New York 1908) .

Secondary Works: Bardenhewer, 0., Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur 3 (2nd ed., Freiburg im Br. 1923). Beck, A., Die Trinitiitslehre des heiligen Hilarius (Mainz 1903). Brown, Sr. M. Vincentia, The Syntax of the Prepositions in the Works of St. Hilary, The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies 41 (Washington 1934). Buttell, Sr. M. Frances, The Rhetoric of St. Hilary of Poi tiers, The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies 38 (Washington 1933). Cayre, F., Patrologie et historie de la theologie 1 (4th ed., Paris 1945). Forster, T., 'Zur Theologie des Hilarius,' Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 61 (1888), 645-686. Gimborn, Br. Thomas, The Syntax of the Simple Cases in St. Hilary of Poitiers, The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies 54 (Washington 1939). Girard, G., Saint Hilaire (Angers 1905). Gummerus, 1-, Die Homousianische Parte; bis :z:um Tode des Konstantlus (Leipzig 1900).

INTRODUCTION

xvii

Kinnavey, R., The Vocabulary of St. Hilary of Poitiers as Contained in the Comme'ntarius in Matthaeum, Liber I ad Constantium, and De Trinitate, The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies 47 (Washington 1935). Labriolle, P., Histoire de la litterature latine chretienne I (3rd ed., Paris 1947). Le Bachelet, X., 'Hilaire (Saint) ev~ue de Poi tiers,' Diction'naire de la theologie catholique 6, coIs. 2388-2462 (Paris 1920). Reinkens, J., Hilarius von Poitiers (Schaffhausen 1864). Stix, J., Zum Sprachgebrauch des hi. Hilarius von Poitiers in seiner Schrift de Trinitate (Rottwell 1891). Tixeront, J., Histoire des dogmes 2 (2nd ed., Paris 1909).

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

. . . . . . .. . . . . .

v

THE TRINITY Book I

3

Book 2

35

Book 3

65

Book 4

91

Book 5

133

Book 6

169

Book 7

223

Book 8

273

Book 9

321

Book 10 .

399

Book II .

459

Book 12 .

501

INDEX

. XIX

• .

.

• .

.

.

547

SAINT HILARY OF POITIERS THE TRINITY

BOOK ONE

i\J

I WAS IN SEARCH of an employment, proper to man and sacred, which by its nature or through the researches of prudent men would result in something worthy of this divine gift, that has been bestowed upon him for knowledge, many things came to my mind which, according to the common opinion seemed to make life useful and desirable, particularly the possession of leisure together with riches, which now as formerly mankind regarded as the most excellent, because the one without the other would be a source of evil rather than an opportunity for good, since leisure without wealth is even looked upon as a kind of exile, while an opulent but restless life may bring greater unhappiness the more undeservedly it lacks what it especially desired and sought to use. Although these things contain, indeed, the highest and most pleasant luxuries of life, they do not seem to differ much from the pleasures of animals, that are free from work and are sated with food, as they roam about in the forests or in the rich pastures. If to rest and to abound be regarded as the best and most perfect occupation of human life, then, in accordance with the capacity of each one's nature, the same kind of existence must be common to us as well as to irrational animals, for all the latter have an abundance for their use without the worry of acquiring, since nature itself provides them with the greatest abundance and security. HEN

3

4

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

(2) Many people, it seems to me, have rejected this degrading and bestial manner of living in their own case and despised it in that of others for no other reason than that under the inspiration of nature itself they believed it unbecoming for man to be born only for the sake of his belly and idleness, and that they have not entered this life from any desire of devoting themselves to noble deeds or to a good occupation, or that this very life has been granted to them without any gain for eternity. There certainly would be no doubt that such a life ought not to be valued as a gift of God, when, tormented by so great pains and entangled by so many annoyances from the ignorance of childhood to the follies of old age, it would consume its own self even within itself. Therefore, in their teaching and conduct they applied themselves to some of the virtues-patience, temperance, and meekness-because in their opinion good deeds and thoughts are the foundation of a good life, for it must not be imagined that an immortal God would grant them a life that would end only in death, since He would not be recognized as a kind benefactor who would impart the most delightful sense of living for the sake of dying amid the most distressing fear. ( 3 ) Although I did not judge this tea~hing of theirs unbecoming or useless, that I should preserve my conscience from every fault, and that I should prudently provide for, or wisely avoid, or patiently endure all the misfortunes of life, the men themselves did not appear to me as fit teachers of a good and happy life in laying down precepts that were merely ordinary and adapted to man's power of comprehension, which, although it would be bestial not to understand, still, to understand them and not to act in accordance with them appeared to exceed the rage of a wild beast's cruelty. My soul, however, hastened not only to do these things, which if I had not done I would have been filled with guilt and remorse, but also to know this God and Author of so

BOOK ONE

5

great a gift to whom it was indebted for all that it had, to serve whom it esteemed as a mark of nobility, in whom it placed all the certainty of its hope, and in whose goodness it rested as in a most safe and familiar port amid such great afflictions of the present day. My soul, therefore, was enkindled with the most ardent desire of comprehending and lmowing Him. ( 4 ) Many of them introduced numerous families of uncertain deities and, imagining that the male and female sex was present in the divine natures, spoke about the birth and the successions of gods from gods. Others proclaimed that there were greater ahd lesser gods and gods differing in power. Some asserted that there was no God at all and venerated only that nature which came into existence through accidental movements or collisions. A great many declared in accordance with the popular belief that there was a God, but asserted that this same God had no concern or interest in human affairs. Some, however, worshiped those corporeal and visible forms of created things themselves in the elements of earth and heaven. Lastly, certain individuals placed their gods in the images of man, animals, beasts, and serpents, and confined the God of the universe and the Author of infinity within the narrow limits of metals, stones, and genealogies. And it was no longer fitting that they who cling to such ridiculous, degrading, and irreligious theories should be the teachers of the truth, when these men themselves were not in agreement about the principles of their most idiotic beliefs. In the midst of all this, my soul in its quest for a useful and unmistakable road to the knowledge of its Lord was perplexed, since it considered it unbecoming for God to be unconcerned about the things which He had created, nor could it believe that an omnipotent and indestructible nature was compatible with the sex of the deities and the succession of parents and offspring. Moreover, it held for certain that the

6

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

Divine and Eternal was nothing else than one and identical, since that which gave existence would not leave behind anything more excellent than itself. Thus, omnipotence and eternity are to be found in One alone, because in omnipotence it was not fitting that there should be things weaker and stronger, and in eternity nothing before or after. In God, however, nothing was to be worshiped except what was eternal and omnipotent. ( 5 ) While, therefore, I was giving serious thought to these and many other similar problems, I chanced upon those books which according to Jewish tradition were written by Moses and the Prophets. In them I found the testimony of God the Creator about Himself expressed in the following manner: 'I AM WHO AM,'l and again: 'Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel: He who is, hath sent me to you.' I was filled with admiration at such a clear definition of God, which spoke of the incomprehensible nature in language most suitable to our human understanding. It is known that there is nothing more characteristic of God than to be, 2 because that itself which is does not belong to those things which will one day end or to those which had a beginning. But, that which combines eternity with the power of unending happiness could never not have been, nor is it possible that one day it will not be, because what is divine is not liable to destruction nor does it have a beginning. And since the eternity of God will not be untrue to itself in anything, He has revealed to us in a fitting manner this fact alone, that He is, in order to render testimony to His everlasting eternity. (6) The words of Him who said: 'I AM WHO AM' seem, indeed, to have fully satisfied the definition of infinity, but we must also learn about the work of His majesty and omniI Exod. 3.14. 2 'Hilarius betrachtet die richtige Auffassung des gottlichen Seins tatsachlich als den Angelpunkt der trinitarischen Lehre .. .' (A. Beck, Die Trinitiitslehre des neiligen Hilarius [Mainz 1903] ll).

BOOK ONE

7

potence. Since being is proper to Him, He who always was would never have had a beginning, and the eternal and everlasting God has again let us hear a statement about Himself that is worthy of Him: 'He who holds the heavens in his palm and the earth in his hand,'3 and again: 'Heaven is my throne and the earth my footstool. What is this house that you will build to me? And what is this place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?'4 The entire heavens is held in the palm of God and the entire earth is confined in His hand. Even if the words of God aid the knowledge of a pious mind, still, when the mind penetrates them, they contain a deeper meaning than when they are heard. The heaven, which is held in His palm, is again the throne of God, and the earth, which is grasped in His hand, is at the same time His footstool. This is in order that we might not imagine that the throne and the footstool are an extension of a bodily form as in the position of one who is seated, since that which is His throne and footstool the omnipotent infinity itself grasps with its hand and once more embraces, but that in all these beginnings of created things God might be recognized as in them and outside of them, reaching beyond them and being found within them, that is, poured about everything and permeating everything, since what the palm and the hand grasp reveal the power of His external nature, and the throne and the footstool show that external things are subject to Him as the One who is within, since He who is within rests upon the things that are without. Thus, He Himself with His whole being contains all things that are within Him and outside of Him, nor is He, the infinite One, separated from all things nor are all things not present within Him who is infinite. My mind, intent on the study of truth, took delight in these !l Isa. 40.12. 4 Cf. Isa. 66.1.2.

8

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

most pious teachings about God. For it did not consider any other thing worthy of God than that He is so far beyond the power of comprehension that the more the infinite spirit would endeavor to encompass Him to any degree, even though it be by an arbitrary assumption, the more the infinity of a measureless eternity would surpass the entire infinity of the nature that pursues it. 5 Although we understood this teaching in a reverent manner, it was clearly confirmed by these words of the Prophet: 'Whither shall I go from thy spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy face? If I ascend into heaven thou art there: if I descend into hell thou art present. If I take my wings early in the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea even there also shall thy hand lead me and thy right hand shall hold me.'6 There is no place without God, nor is there any place which is not in God. He is in heaven, in hell, and beyond the seas. He is within all things; He comes forth and is outside all things. While He thus possesses and is possessed, He is not included in anything nor is He not in all things. (7) Although my soul was filled with joy, therefore, at the contemplation of this excellent and ineffable knowledge, because it worshiped this infinity of a boundless eternity in this Father and Creator, still, by a more intensive study it sought for that form itself of its infinite and eternal Lord, so that it believed that the immeasurable immensity was clothed in some of the splendor of beautiful wisdom. While the religious mind was held captive by the error of its own weakness, the words of the Prophet impart to it this method for apprehending the knowledge of God's supreme beauty: 'For by the greatness of the work and the beauty of the creatures 5 Cf. De God is seek to 6 Cf. Ps.

Trinitate 12.25, where the saint declares that the eternity of continually drawing away from our infinite perceptions that overtake it. 138.7-10.

BOOK ONE

9

the creator of the generations is reasonably known.'7 The creator of the great belongs to the greatest and the maker of beautiful things to the most beautiful. And since the work surpasses even our comprehension, so the worker must far exceed our comprehension. The heavens, the sky, the earth, the sea, and the whole universe are beautiful, wherefore, because of its splendor, as even the Greeks agree, it appears to be called deservedly k6smos, that is, the ornament. 8 If the mind by its natural instinct can thus measure the very beauty of things, as even happens in certain species of birds and animals, so that, while their language is not an expression of thought, their mind, although perceiving the object itself, does not speak of it,9-again, since all speech proceeds from thought, the mind that perceives it speaks of it to itself, should not the Lord of this beauty itself be conceived as the most beautiful of all beauty, so that, while the form of His eternal adornment eludes the mind's power of comprehension, the ornament is not withdrawn from the mind's power of comprehension? And we must acknowledge God as the most beautiful of all in this manner, that He is not included within the thoughts that we comprehend nor is He beyond the comprehension of our thoughts. 10 ( 8 ) The soul, therefore, imbued with an eager longing for pious beliefs and doctrines, rested, as it were, in a retreat and watchtower of this most august contemplation. It was aware that nothing else was left to it from its nature, whereby it could render a greater or less service to its Creator than 7 Wisd. 13.5 (Septuagint). 8 The same proof and Greek word are used by Tertullian, ApoJogeticum 17. 9 His meaning probably is that some species of birds and animals recognize the beauty of the universe by their instinct and express it by some outward sign, e.g., the singing of birds. 10 1£ the beauty of the universe that we can perceive fills us with delight, then the nature of Him who created the universe, that we cannot perceive, must be the most beautiful of all things.

10

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

that it recognize Him as so great that He cannot be comprehended and can be believed, while the faith takes for granted a knowledge of the indispensable religion, and the infinity of the limitless power surpasses this knowledge. (9) Amid all these speculations, however, a natural yearning was still hidden, that the profession of piety would be encouraged by some hope of an everlasting happiness, which a devout belief in God and a good moral life would merit as a reward for a victorious warfare. Nor would there be any advantage in thinking correctly about God if death were to destroy all sensation and, as it were, the certain setting of an exhausted nature would bring about its destruction. Moreover, reason itself convinced him that it was unworthy of God to have brought man into this life as a sharer in His council and prudence in order that his life might one day end and his death last for all eternity, that it was unworthy of God to have given existence to him who did not exist in order that when he had come into existence he might not exist. For, this can be regarded as the sole purpose of our creation: that what did not exist began to exist, not that what had begun to exist would cease to exist. ( 10 ) My soul, however, was filled with anxiety partly for itself and partly for the body. While it remained unshaken in its devout belief in God, it was gripped at the same time with fear about itself and its dwelling, which, it thought, was destined for destruction. After becoming familiar with the Law and the Prophets, it learned about the promises of the evangelical and apostolic doctrine. 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing that has been made. In him is life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness; and the darkness grasped it not. There was a man, one sent from God, whose

BOOK ONE

11

name was John. This man came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the light. He was not himself the light, but was to bear witness to the light. It was the true light that enlightens every man who comes into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own and his own received him not. But to as many as received him he gave the power of becoming the sons of God, to those who believe in his name: Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. And we saw his glory-glory as of the only-begotten of the Fatherfull of grace and of truth.'ll My mind advances beyond the knowledge of natural reason and is taught more about God than it suspected. It learns that its Creator is God from God; it hears that the Word is God and is with God from the beginning. It knows the light of the world, that remains in the world and is not comprehended by the world. It recognizes Him who comes unto His own and is not received by them, while those who do receive Him through the merit of faith are made the children of God, not by the embrace of the flesh, nor by the conception of blood, nor by the will of the bodies, but are born from God. Finally, it acknowledges that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, that His glory has been seen which, as belonging to the only Son of the Father, is perfect in grace and in truth. ( 11 ) By these words my fearful and anxious soul found greater hope than it had anticipated. First of all, it received the knowledge of God the Father. What it previously believed from natural reason about the eternity, infinity, and form of its Creator it now realizes as proper also to the onlybegotten God. It does not believe in many gods, because it II Cf. John 1.1-14.

12

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

hears of God from God, nor does it accept a difference in nature between God and God, because it learns that the God who is from God is full of grace and truth, nor does it imagine that there is an earlier and later God from God because it holds that God was with God in the beginning. It perceives that the belief in the life-bringing doctrine is very rare but merits the greatest reward, for His own did not receive Him, and those who do receive Him are raised to be sons of God not by a birth from the flesh but by faith. To be the sons of God, however, is not a compulsion, but a power, since this divine gift is offered to all. It is not obtained from the nature of our parents, but the will merits the reward. And lest this very fact, that the power has been given to everyone to become a son of God, might scandalize some of weak faith who because of the difficulty in obtaining it would be the least disposed to hope for it-for the more something is desired the less it is believed-the Word God became flesh in order that through God the Word made flesh, the flesh might be elevated to God the Word. And in order that the incarnate Word of God might not be anything else than the God the Word, or anything else than flesh of our flesh, He dwelt among us, so that while He dwells He remains nothing else than God. While He dwells among us, God became nothing else than flesh of our flesh. By humbling Himself to take our flesh He did not lose His own proper nature, because as the only-begotten of the Father He is full of grace and truth; He is perfect in His own and true in ours.12 ( 12) My soul, therefore, gladly accepted this doctrine of the divine revelation: to proceed through the flesh to God, to be called to a new birth by faith, to be permitted by His 12 This passage is a refutation of the future errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, and teaches that the Verbum still remains God even while having a real human nature.

BOOK ONE

13

power to obtain a heavenly regeneration. In all this it sees the solicitude of its Father and Creator, nor does it believe that it would be annihilated by Him through whom it had been brought from nothingness to this very thing that it is. All of this is beyond the range of the human mind because reason, incapable of grasping the ordinary teachings of heavenly wisdom, regards this only as proper to the nature of things-to be either what it perceives within itself or what issues forth from itself. It measured the attributes of God according to the magnificence of the eternal power, not with the mind, but with its unbounded faith, so that it refused to give up its belief in the doctrine that God was in the beginning with God, and that the Word made flesh dwelt among us because it could not understand, but it remembered that it would be able to understand if it believed. ( 13) Besides, the Apostle, to prevent any error of human wisdom from proving an obstacle, teaches us to have the most absolute certainty in this pious profession of faith by the divine words: 'See to it that no one robs you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ. In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and in him who is the head of every Principality and Power you have received of that fullness. In him, too, you have been circumcised with a circumcision not wrought by hand, but through putting off the body of the flesh, a circumcision which is of Christ. You were buried together with him in baptism and in him also rose again through faith in the working of God who raised him from the dead. And you, when you were dead by reason of your sin and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he brought to life along with him, forgiving all your sins, canceling the decree against us, which was hostile to us. Indeed, he has taken it from our midst, nailing it to the cross; having put off the flesh he made a show of powers

14

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

openly triumphing over them with confidence in himself.'13 A firm faith rejects the captious and useless questions of philosophy, nor does truth become the victim of falsehood by yielding to the fallacies of human absurdities. It does not confine God within the terms of ordinary understanding, nor does it judge of Christ, in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily, according to the elements of the world, so that, while there is in Him the infinity of the eternal power, the power of eternal infinity surpasses the comprehension of the earthly mind. He who elevates us to the nature of His Godhead has no longer restricted us to the corporeal observance of the commandments, nor has He obliged us through the shadow of the law to the practices of bodily circumcision, but in order that the spirit, when it had been circumcized from vices, might cleanse every natural necessity of the body by the purification from sin. By His death we would be buried together in baptism that we might return to eternal life, while death after life would be a rebirth to life, and dying to our vices we would be born again to immortality. Renouncing His immortality, He dies for us that we may be raised from death to immortality with Him. For, He received the flesh of sin that by assuming our flesh He might forgive our sin, but, while He takes our flesh, He does not share in our sin. By His death He destroyed the sentence of death in order that by the new creation of our race in His person He might abolish the sentence of the former decree. He allows Himself to be nailed to the cross in order that by the curse of the cross all the maledictions of our earthly condemnation might be nailed to it and obliterated. Finally, He suffers as man in order to shame the Powers. While God, according to the Scriptures, is to die, He would triumph with the confidence in Himself of a conqueror. While He, 13 Cf. Col. 2.8·15.

BOOK ONE

15

the immortal One, would not be overcome by death, He would die for the eternal life of us mortals. These deeds of God, therefore, are beyond the understanding of our human nature, and do not fit in with our natural process of thought, because the operation of a limitless eternity demands an infinite comprehension of measuring things, so that it is not a conclusion of reason but a limitation of power when God becomes man, when the Immortal dies, when the Eternal is buried. Again, on the other hand, it does not depend on our manner of thinking but on omnipotence that He appears as God from a man, as immortal from one who is dead, and as eternal from one who is buried. Hence, we are revivified together by God in Christ through His death. But, while there is the fullness of the Godhead in Christ, God the Father is pointed out, who brings us back to life in one who is dead, and also Christ Jesus, whom we are to confess as none other than God with the fullness of the Godhead. ( 14) F or this reason my soul was at rest, conscious of its own security and full of joy in its aspirations; it feared the coming of death so little as to regard it as the life of eternity. No longer did it look upon the life of this body of his as troublesome or wearisome, but believed it to be what the alphabet is to boys, medicine to the sick, swimming to the shipwrecked, training to the adolescent, warfare to the future commander, namely, as the patient endurance of the present trials of life in order to gain a blissful eternity. Indeed, the soul, entrusted with the ministry of the priesthood, also preached to others what it believed for itself, and thus extended the duties of its office in order to provide for the salvation of all mankind. ( 15) In the meantime, men of ungodly rashness appeared, despairing in themselves and merciless toward everyone. They measured the omnipotent nature of God by the

16

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

weakness of their own nature, not that they exalted themselves to the heights of infinity in their conjectures about infinite things, but confined infinite things within the boundaries of their own power of comprehension and made themselves the judges of religion, since the practice of religion is an obligation of obedience. They were unmindful of who they were, reckless in divine matters, and reformers of the commandments. (16) To pass over in silence the other extremely ridiculous beliefs of the heretics-but which we shall discuss when the opportunity presents itself in the course of our treatise-there are certain individuals who so distort the mystery of the evangelical faith that they deny the birth of the only-begotten God, while piously professing that there is only one God, that there is an extension rather than a descent into man, that He who became the Son of Man from the moment He assumed our flesh never existed previously and is not the Son of God, that in Him there is not a birth from God but the same one comes from the same one, in order that this unbroken, unweakened continuity, as they believe, may preserve intact our faith in the one God, while the Father, who has extended Himself even to the Virgin, is born as the Son. 14 There are others, on the contrary (since there is no salvation without Him who as God the Word was with God in the beginning), who, while denying the birth, have acknowledged creation alone, so that the birth does not admit the true nature of God, and creation teaches that He is a false God, and, while this would misrepresent the faith in the nature of the one God, it would not exclude it in the mystery.15 In place of the true birth they substitute the name 14 This is the teaching of Sabellius. 15 According to the heretics, Christ could not be the true Son of God, since He was created by God, not born from God, but they claimed that in the 'mystery: or God's plan of salvation, Christ, although a creature, could be called the adopted Son of God, just as many other creatures are called the sons of God. Such is Coustant's opinion of this difficult passage, where the manuscripts are not in agreement.

BOOK ONE

17

and faith of creation, and separate Him from the true nature of the one God in order that a creature may not usurp the perfection of the Godhead, which had not been given by the birth of a true nature. ( 17 ) My soul burned with the desire of replying to the fury of these men, since it remembered that this fact is particularly helpful to salvation not only to believe in God but also in God the Father, not only to hope in Christ but to hope in Christ as the Son of God, and not as a creature but as God the Creator who was born from God. Therefore, relying for the most part on the testimony of the Prophets and the Gospels, we hasten to refute the madness and ignorance of those who, by this teaching of the one God as the only doctrine that is indeed useful and reverential, either deny that Christ was born as God or contend that He is not the true God, so that the creation of a mighty creature does not destroy the mystery of faith in the one God, because the birth of God would lead those astray who profess their belief in the one God. But we, who have been taught by God to proclaim that there are neither two gods nor a solitary one, in professing our faith in God the Father and God the Son shall follow the method of instruction used by the Gospels and the Prophets, namely, that in our creed both are one nature and not one person, nor do we acknowledge that both are one and the same, nor is there something else between the true and false God, because, where God is born from God, the birth does not allow them to be the same, nor something else to be between them. 16 (18) And you, indeed, who have been inspired to read by your ardent faith and zeal for the truth, that is unknown to the world and to the wise ones of the world, must re16 This is a fundamental principle of St. Hilary's that he is constantly repeating throughout this work. If Christ is born from God, then He must be a different Person from the Father, and at the same time He cannot have a different divine nature from His Father.

18

ST. HILARY OF POITlERS

member that the shallow and foolish opinions of men are to be rejected and all the narrow limits of our imperfect knowledge are to be extended by a pious eagerness for knowledge. The regenerated spirit needs new faculties in order that everyone's conscience may be enlightened by the gift that comes from heaven. Therefore, as holy Jeremias warns,17 he must take up his stand by faith in the nature of. God so that, when he shall hear about the nature of God, he may direct his mind to the things that are worthy of God, but he must do so in accordance with no other norm for judging except that of infinity. Since he is conscious of being made a sharer in the divine nature,18 as blessed Peter declares in his second Epistle, he must measure the nature of God not by the laws of his own nature but evaluate the divine truths in accordance with the magnificence of God's testimony concerning Himself. The best reader is he who looks for the meaning of the words in the words themselves rather than reads his meaning into them, who carries away more than he brought, and who does not insist that the words signify what he presupposed before reading them. Therefore, since our treatise will be about the things of God, let us concede to God the knowledge about Himself, and let us humbly submit to His words with reverent awe. For He is a competent witness for Himself who is not known except by Himself. ( 19) If in our study of the nature and birth of God we shall cite some examples for the sake of illustration, let no one imagine that these are in themselves a perfect and complete explanation. There is no comparison between earthly things and God, but the limitations of our knowledge force us to look for certain resemblances in inferior things as if they were manifestations of higher things, in order that, while 17 Jer. 23.14. The word substantia, which the saint uses, is according to the Septuagint; the Vulgate has consilio. 18 2 Peter 1.4.

BOOK ONE

19

we are being made aware of familiar and ordinary things, we may be drawn from our conscious manner of reasoning to think in a fashion to which we are not accustomed. Every analogy, therefore, is to be considered as more useful to man than as appropriate to God, because it hints at the meaning rather than explains it fully. And the comparison should not be regarded as presumptuous in placing the natures of the flesh and the spirit, the invisible and the tangible, on an equality, since it declares that it is necessary for the weakness of the human understanding and bears no ill-will because it is only an unsatisfactory illustration. We proceed, therefore, to our task and shall speak of God in the words of God, but at the same time we shall come to the aid of our understanding by analogies drawn from circumstances in our own life. (20) First of all, we have planned our work in such a manner that the Books are connected and follow an order that is best adapted for the readers' progress. We have decided not to offer anything that was not well co-ordinated and assimilated, in order that the work might not appear like a tumultuous gathering of peasants who are shouting in confusion. Because precipitous places cannot be scaled except by climbing gradually to the top along the steps placed one upon the other, we have also, so to speak, arranged certain beginnings of our ascent in an orderly fashion and have alleviated the arduous journey of knowledge as if it were to a more pleasant elevation. We have done so not by cutting out steps, but by a gradual slope of the surface, so that the walkers are ascending and hardly realize that they are doing so. ( 21 ) After the present Book, the first of the treatise, the next explains the mystery of divine faith in such a manner that those who are to be baptized in the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit may understand the true nature of the names and not confuse the meaning of the words, but con-

20

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

ceive each one as He is and as He is named. From the statements that are made they will realize very clearly that the true nature is appropriate to the name and the name to the true nature. (22) Then, after a simple and brief description of the Trinity, Book 3, although slowly, still continues to make progress. That which the Lord revealed about Himself as being beyond the comprehension of the human mind, as when He says: 'I in the Father and the Father in me,'19 He adapts to the understanding of faith by the greatest possible examples of His omnipotence, so that which man does not grasp because of his sluggish nature may be now obtained by the faith of a reasonable knowledge,20 because we must believe God when speaking about Himself and must not imagine that the understanding of His power is beyond the reasonableness of faith. (23) Book 4 then begins with the doctrines of the heretics and is not tainted with those defects by which the faith of the Church is brought into evil repute. It cites that very explanation of their unbelief, which many of them issued only recently, and denounces them for defending the one God from the Law in a sly and therefore in a most godless manner. From all the evidence in the Law and the Prophets it is shown to be blasphemy to acknowledge the one God without Christ as God, and a lack of faith not to proclaim the one God after asserting that Christ is the only-begotten God. (24) In Book 5, however, when replying to the heretics, we have followed the order which they adopted in their profession of faith. Since they misrepresented the teaching that there is one God according to the Law, they were also guilty of self-deception when they concluded from it that 19 John 10.38. 20 Faith is called 'reasonable knowledge' because our reason tells us that we must believe God, and also that God can do more than our human mind can conceive.

BOOK ONE

21

there is only one true God, so that by isolating the one true God they would deny the birth of Christ our Lord, for where there is a birth the possession of a true nature is understood. But step by step, while we are teaching the doctrine itself which has been denied, we have proclaimed from the Law and the Prophets that there are not two gods or one solitary God, but the true God the Father, so that we have neither perverted the faith in the one God nor denied the birth. Since, according to them, the Lord Jesus Christ has been created rather than born, the name of God should be attributed to Him rather than be inherent in Him. From the prophetical books we have established that He possesses the true nature of the Godhead in such a manner that, after proclaiming the Lord Jesus Christ as the true God, the true nature of His divine birth has strengthened us in the understanding of the one true God. (25) Book 6 now reveals the complete duplicity of this heretical declaration. In order that their own words might be believed, they condemn the statements and mistakes of the heretics-Valentinian, Sabellius, Mani, and Hieracas-and have stolen the pious beliefs of the Church as a disguise for their own impious teachings, in order that, when they have twisted the words of these godless men into a better meaning and have modified their ambiguous language, they might suppress the pious doctrine under the pretext of disapproving impiety.21 After explaining the words and statements of these individuals, we have clarified the holy teachings of the Church and we have not tolerated anything in common with these accursed heretics, in order that, while condemning what must be condemned, we might cling to those beliefs which are to be held in veneration. Thus, we conclude that 21 The Arians interpreted the doctrines of other heretics in such a manner that they seemed to be in agreement with the doctrines which the Church had defined at the Council of Nice.

22

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, which they especially deny, from these facts: the Father bears testimony to Him, He Himself makes such a profession about Himself, the Apostles preach it, devout people believe it, the devils cry out against it, ignorant heathens understand it, so that we are no longer justified in doubting about that which was left to us to become known. (26) Book 7 next directs the tone of the discussion which we have undertaken according to the standard of the perfect faith. In the first place, after a sound and frank exposition of the unassailable faith, it joins in the quarrel between Sabellius, Ebion, and those who do not proclaim the true God, and asks why Sabellius denies His existence before the world whom the others confessed that He was created. Sabellius did not know about the existence of the Son, while he did not doubt that the true God worked in a body. But these others rejected the birth and declared that He was only a creature, while they do not recognize His miracles as the miracles of the true God. Their disagreement is our faith. For, while Sabellius repudiates the Son (and therefore errs), he conquers in this, that the true God (as he correctly shows) has worked, and the Church triumphs over those who have denied the true God in Christ. When the others prove against him that Christ who exists before the world has always worked, then we share in their triumph, for, like them, we have condemned Sabellius, who knows the true God but does not know the Son of God. Ebion is conquered by both groups in this manner, that the one [Arius] convincingly demonstrates that He exists before the world, and the other [Sabellius] that He always worked. All, by conquering one another, arc mutually conquered, because the Church testifies against Sabellius, against those who recognize Him only as a creature, and against Ebion that the Lord Jesus Christ is

BOOK ONE

23

the true God and from the true God, born before the ages and afterwards begotten as man. (27) Since, on the authority of the Law and the Prophets, we had first proclaimed Him as the Son of God and later on as also the true God in the mystery of unity, no one doubts that it is very much in harmony with the doctrine of godliness for the Gospels to give added confirmation to the Law and the Prophets and to teach from them, first of all, that He is the Son of God, and, afterwards, that He is also the true God. It was therefore most fitting that, after giving the name of the Son, we should reveal His true nature, although, according to the common opinion, the title of Son is a clear indication of the true nature. In order that those who oppose the true nature of the only-begotten God may not be provided with any opportunity for deception or mockery, we have based the faith itself in His true nature on the truth of His divinity. We teach that He is God, who is admitted to be the Son of God, in the following ways: by His name, birth, nature, power, and confession, so that He is nothing else than what He is called, nor is the name incompatible with the birth, nor has the birth taken away the nature, nor has the nature forsaken the power, nor has even the power remained unknown, since the true nature has been consciously revealed. We have, therefore, added all the proofs from the Gospels for these specific attributes, so that the confession was not silent about the power, the power does not keep to itself the revelation of the nature, nor does the nature not belong to His birth, nor does the birth belie His name. Thus, unbelief has been afforded no pretext for misrepresentation, since Jesus Christ Himself, by making known the true nature, which is His by birth, has also taught us the divinity of the true God from the true God according to the name, birth, nature, and power.

24

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

(28) Since the two preceding Books about the Son of God and the true God have enabled the believers to make progress in the faith, Book 8 is entirely concerned with the evidence for the one God. It does not eliminate the birth of the Son; neither does it admit the divine nature in two gods. It has first informed us of the methods whereby the heretics seek to avoid the true nature of God the Father and God the Son by exposing their ridiculous and absurd evasions. To them, therefore, such quotations as the following: 'But the multitude of the believers were of one heart and one soul,'22 and again: 'Now he who plants and he who waters are one,'23 and once more: 'Yet not for these only do I pray, but for those also who through their word are to believe in me, that all may be one, even as thou, Father, in me and I in thee; that they also may be one in US,'24 lead to the conclusion that the true nature is a result of the will and harmony rather than of the Godhead. When we study these statements themselves in accordance with the meaning of the words, we prove that they contain in themselves the faith of the divine birth. While we consider the whole contents of the Lord's words, from the statements of the Apostles and the properties of the Holy Spirit, we have taught the complete and perfect mystery concerning the majesty of the Father and the only-begotten Son, since through the concept of the Son in the Father and the recognition of the Father in the Son there is taught the true birth of the only-begotten God and the true nature of the perfect God in Him. (29) It is of little help, however, in matters that are most necessary for salvation to meet the requirements of faith by quoting only the evidence that is in agreement with it. As a rule, assertions which are made without proof deceive even 22 Cf. Acts 4.32. 23 1 Cor. 3.8. 24 John 17.20,2l.

BOOK ONE

25

while flattering our understanding, unless the emptiness of contrary arguments is also shown and the very fact that they are shown to be absurd strengthens our own faith. The whole of Book 9, therefore, is devoted to refuting the testimony which these impious men have used to undermine the birth of the only-begotten God, unaware as they are of the mysterious plan of salvation that has been hidden since the beginning of the world, and who do not recall that the faith of the Gospel proclaims Him as God and man. When they deny that our Lord Jesus Christ is Goel, that He is like God and equal to God, as God the Son to God the Father, that He is born from God, and, according to the true nature of His birth, that He is in possession of the true nature of the Spirit, they are wont to appeal to these statements of the Lord: 'Why dost thou call me good? No one is good but God only,'25 so that, since He disapproves of being called good and testifies that the one God alone is good, He does not possess the goodness of God who is good, nor the true nature of God who is one. To these words they also join the following to corroborate their blasphemous doctrine: 'Now this is everlasting life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ,'26 so that, when He acknowledges the Father as the only true God, He Himself is not the true God, nor is He God at all, because in this limitation of the only true God we do not go beyond Him who possesses the true nature that has been designated. 27 We must realize that these words were not spoken in an ambiguous manner, because the same one has declared: 'The Son can do nothing of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing,'28 so that, since He can do nothing unless 25 Luke 18.19. 26 John 17.3. 27 The meaning is that the attributes of the Father are contained in Him in such a manner that they cannot be communicated to anyone else. and therefore Christ could not be true God. 28 John 5.19.

26

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

there is a pattern of the work before Him, a weakness of nature must be recognized in Him. That which must make use of the work of someone else certainly cannot be likened to omnipotence, and our own power of reasoning convinces us that there is a distinction between being able to do and not being able to do all things. They differ to such an extent that He expressed Himself in this manner concerning God the Father: 'The Father is greater than 1.'29 May this uncompromising statement put an end to the intrigues of our adversaries, because it is indicative of blasphemy and madness to confer the glory and nature of God on one who rejects them! In any case, He is so far removed from the nature of the true God that He even testified: 'But of that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone,'30 so that, since the Son does not know what the Father alone knows, the one who does not know is far different from the one who does know, because a nature which is liable to ignorance does not possess the divinity and power of that which is not subject to the domination of ignorance. (30) Therefore, while we pointed out that these texts were interpreted in such a most blasphemous manner because their meaning was misrepresented and distorted, we have adduced all the reasons for these statements from the very nature of the questions, or the circumstances of time, or the plan of salvation. We make the words dependent upon the reasons rather than consider the reasons as mere adjuncts to the words. Thus, since the words, 'The Father is greater than 1,'31 and 'I and the Father are one,'32 do not agree, and the same thing is not contained in the words, 'No one is good 29 30 31 32

John 14.28. Cf. Mark 13.32. John 14.28. John 10.30.

BOOK ONE

27

but God only,'33 as in 'He who sees me sees also the Father,'34 and there certainly is just as great a difference between 'Father, all things that are mine are thine'35 and 'That they may know thee, the only true God'36 as between 'I am in the Father and the Father in me'37 and 'But of that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son but the Father alone,'38 we are to understand in each instance the promulgations of the plans of salvation and the deliberate assertions of a natural power, since the same individual is also the author of both statements. When we have pointed out the properties of each nature, however, it will be seen that what we teach concerning the plan of salvation, whether the cause, the time, the birth, or the name, pertains to the mystery of the evangelical faith and does not lead to any abasement of the true Godhead. (31 ) The arrangement in Book 10 is the same as that in the faith itself. Since they have distorted certain things about the nature of the Passion and statements made during it by comprehending them in a foolish manner for the sake of lessening respect for the divine nature and power in the Lord Jesus Christ, so we must bring out that they have placed a most godless construction upon them and that they were mentioned by our Lord as a testimony to the true and perfect glory that is His. For, in order to be blasphemous under the guise of piety, they interpret these words in their favor: 'My soul is sad, even unto death,'39 so that He is far from enjoying the blessedness and indestructibility of God whose soul allows itself to be dominated by the fear of imminent sorrow, and who was so crushed by the necessity of 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Luke John John John John Mark Matt.

18.19. 14.9. 17.10. 17.3. 14.11. 13.31. 26.38.

28

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

having to suffer that He prayed: 'Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me.'40 And there is no doubt that He seemed to fear to endure that which He prayed that He might not suffer, because the fear of suffering caused Him to pray that it might be taken away. The power of this sorrow oppressed Him so much in His weakness that at the time of the crucifixion He cried out: 'God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?'41 He who was afflicted by the bitterness of His suffering so as even to complain of His desolation was also in need of the Father's help, and gave up His spirit when He spoke these words: 'Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.'42 The dread of giving up the spirit afflicted Him and He commended it to the protection of God the Father and His own lack of confidence and assurance forced Him to commend Himself to another. (32 ) These most irrational and irreverent men do not realize that there is nothing contradictory in the same things which the same individual has uttered, and by adhering only to the words they have lost sight of the reasons for which they were said. Since there is a great difference between 'My soul is sad, even unto death'43 and 'Hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of the Power,'44 and 'Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me'45 is not the same as 'Shall I not drink the cup that my Father has given me?'46 and the words 'God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?'47 do not agree with 'Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in Paradise,'48 and the sen40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Matt. 26.39. Cf. Matt. 27.46. Luke 23.46. Matt. 26.38. Cf. Matt. 26.64. Matt. 26.39. John 18.ll. Matt. 27.46. Luke 23.43.

BOOK ONE

29

tence 'Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit'49 is at variance with 'Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing,' 50 they have fallen into ungodliness and do not understand the words of God. Since fear cannot be reconciled with courage, willingness with pleading, complaint with exhortation, lack of confidence with mediation, these men, unmindful of the divine and natural confession, have alleged the deeds and words of the economy of salvation as proofs for their impiety. Therefore, since we have explained everything in the mysterious doctrine of the soul and body of the Lord Jesus Christ, there is nothing that we have not examined, and nothing that we have not discussed, and we have produced a harmonious reconciliation of all these words by placing each one in its proper category so that confidence does become faint-hearted, nor does willingness seek to escape, nor does peace of mind complain, and He who recommended Himself in prayer sought pardon for others. And we strengthen the faith in all these words by teaching the mystery of the Gospel in its entirety. (33) Since, then, not even the glory of the Resurrection itself has made these most reckless men listen to reason and remain within the limits of religious knowledge, either they have forged the weapons of their impiety from the admission of His abasement, or they have made use of the revealed mystery in order to offer insult to God, so that, because of what was said: 'I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God,'51 while we as well as He have the Father in common as our Father, and His God as our God, the acknowledgment of something in common precludes Him from being the true God, and the need of being created has made Him as well as us subject to God the Creator, and 49 Luke 23.46. 50 Luke 23.34. 51 John 20.17.

30

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

adoption elevates Him to be His Son. According to the words of the Apostle, no attribute of the divine nature should be ascribed to Him: 'But when he says all things are subject to him, undoubtedly he is excepted who has subjected all things to him. For when all things are made subject to him then he himself will be subject to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.'52 Because subjection testifies to the weakness of the subject and indicates the power of the ruler, Book 11 is also concerned with these questions and discusses them with the most thorough explanation of godliness. It also proves that these very words of the Apostle not only do not lead to any weakness of the divinity but reveal the true nature of the God who is born from God. Therefore, from the fact that His Father is our Father and His God our God, we gain much and nothing is taken away from Him, that is to say, since He was born as man and endured all the sufferings of the flesh, He ascended to our God and Father in order that in our manhood He might be glorified into God. (34) That which is always observed, according to our recollection, in every branch of learning-that when they have been instructed from the beginning and for a long time in some insignificant exercise and have become familiar over an extended period with the more humble task, then they are permitted to be tested in the subjects to which they have been accustomed, so that when those who plan a military career have been well trained in the art of war they are received into the army, or that when those who have completed the classroom practices in the rhetorical schools are admitted to the disputes in the courts, or that when the sailor has courageously guided the vessel in the inland waters he is then exposed to the storms of the large and strange sea-we have attempted to do in the most important and weighty knowledge of the entire creed. 52 Cf. 1 Cor. 15.27,28.

BOOK ONE

31

When we had previously instructed the immature faith in the simple rudiments concerning the birth, the name, the divinity, and the true nature, and by moving steadily forward had encouraged the eager readers to avoid all the snares of the heretics, then we led them into the very arena of the great and glorious combat in order that, inasmuch as the human mind, according to the common opinion, fails to grasp the idea of an eternal birth by means of ordinary knowledge, so much the more should they rely upon divine meditations in order to understand matters that are beyond the comprehension of our rational nature. We expose particularly the sophistry that is so prevalent because of the stupidity of worldly wisdom, and which imagines that it is correctly stated about the Lord Jesus: 'There was a time when He was not' and 'He did not exist before He was born,' and 'He was made out of non-existing things,' because birth seems to take for granted that He should receive being who did not possess it, and that He should be born since He did not exist. For this reason they also subject the only-begotten God to the order of time (just as if the faith and the account of the birth themselves prove that at one time He did not exist), and therefore they assert that He was born from the very fact that He did not exist, because birth had given to Him a nature which He did not have. While we proclaim, in accordance with the testimony of the Apostles and the Gospels, that the Father always was and the Son always was, we shall teach that the God of all. was not after some things but before all things. Nor does this rash and godless doctrine apply to Him that He was born from non-existing things and that He was not before He was born, but that He always was in such a manner that we proclaim that He was also born, but born in such a manner that we make known that He always was. It is not the unique privilege of not being born, but of an eternal birth that is proper to

32

ST. HILARY OF POlTIERS

Him, because birth also requires a parent, and divinity is not lacking in eternity. (35) Because they are ignorant of the words of the Prophets and unskilled in heavenly doctrine, they attempt by a distortion of the sense and meaning to maintain that God was created rather than born because it was said: 'The Lord created me for the beginning of his ways, for his works,'53 so that He belongs to the common order of created things, although in a higher class of creation, nor does He en joy the glory of the divine birth, but the power of a mighty creature. Without citing anything new or without presupposing anything extrinsic to the subject, we shall explain the true meaning and intention of this testimony from Wisdom Itself. We cannot apply the words, that He was created for the beginning of His ways for His works, to the concept of the divine and eternal birth, because there is a difference between being created for these things and being created before all things, since, where a birth is meant, there is an avowal only of the birth, but, where the term creation is used, there always exists a prior cause of this creation. Since Wisdom was born before all things, but since it was also created for some things, that which is before all things is not the same as that which began to be after some things. (36) Therefore, it seemed logical that, after rejecting the name of creation from our faith in the only-begotten God, we should also teach those things which are also suitable and reverential in our profession of faith concerning the Holy Spirit, in order that those who had been already strengthened by the long and careful discussions of the earlier Books might not be wanting in a complete knowledge of our entire creed, since, after the heretical and erroneous teachings concerning the Holy Spirit had been eliminated, the mystery of the Trinity, through which we are reborn, remained unharmed and 53 Cf. Provo 8.22.

BOOK ONE

33

undefiled within the saving definition by the authority of the Apostles and Gospels. Certainly, no one would dare any longer to follow the views of human reason and place the Holy Spirit in the ranks of creatures whom we would receive as a pledge of immortality and for a share in the divine and indestructible nature. 54 (37) 0 almighty God the Father, I am fully conscious that lowe this to You as the special duty of my life that all my words and thoughts should speak of You. This readiness of speech which You have granted to me can obtain for me here no greater reward than to serve You by proclaiming You, and by revealing to the world that does not know You and to the heretic that denies You what You are, namely, the Father of the only-begotten God. This is, to be sure, only the expression of my will. Besides this, I must pray for the gift of Your help and mercy that You may fill the sails of our faith and profession which have been extended to You with the breath of Your Spirit and direct us along the course of instruction that we have chartered. The Author of this promise is not unfaithful to us who says: 'Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to yoU.'55 We, of course, in our helplessness shall pray for those things that we need, and shall apply ourselves with tireless zeal to the study of all the words of Your Prophets and Apostles and shall knock at all the doors of wisdom that are closed to us, but it is for You to grant our prayer, to be present when we seek, to open when we knock. Because of the laziness and dullness of our nature, we are, as it were, in a trance, and in regard to the understanding of Your attributes we are restricted within the confines of ignorance by the weakness of our intellect. Zeal for Your 54 In these words St. Hilary expresses his belief in the true divinity of the Holy Spirit. The latter is not to be classified as a creature and He will enable us to share in the nature of God Himself. 55 Luke 11.9.

34

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

doctrine leads us to grasp the knowledge of divine things and the obedience of faith carries us beyond the natural power of comprehension. (38) We hope, therefore, that You will set in motion the beginning of our timid venture and will encourage it by a steady progress and will summon us to share in the prophetic and apostolic spirit in order that we may understand their words in no other sense than that in which they spoke them, and that we may explain the proper meaning of the words in accordance with the realities they signify. We shall speak of subjects which they have announced in the mystery: that You are the eternal God, the Father of the eternal onlybegotten God, that You alone are without birth, and the one Lord Jesus Christ who is from You by an eternal birth, not to be placed among the number of the deities by a difference in the true nature, nor to be proclaimed as not being born from You, who are the true God, nor to be confessed as anything else than God who has been born from You, the true God the Father. Bestow upon us, therefore, the meaning of words, the light of understanding, the nobility of diction, and the faith of the true nature. And grant that what we believe we may also speak, namely, that, while we recognize You as the only God the Father and the only Lord Jesus Christ from the Prophets and the Apostles, we may now succeed against the denials of the heretics in honoring you as God in such a manner that You are not alone, and proclaiming Him as God in such a manner that He may not be false.

BOOK TWO

O

WORD OF GOD, together with the very power of its own truth which we received from the testimony of the Evangelist, was sufficient for those who believe, since He says: 'Going now, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world.'l For, what is there pertaining to the mystery of man's salvation that it does not contain? Or is there anything that is omitted or obscure? Everything is full as from fullness and perfect as from perfection. It includes the meaning of the words, the efficacy of the actions, the order of procedure, and the concept of the nature. He commanded them to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, that is, in the confession of the Origin, the Only-begotten, and the Gift. There is one source of all. God the Father is one from whom are all things; and our Lord Jesus Christ is one through whom are all things; and the Holy Spirit is one, the gift in all things. Everything is arranged, therefore, according to its power and merits. There is one Power from whom are all things, one Offspring through whom are all things, and one Gift of perfect hope. Nor will anything be found wanting to a RE

1 Cf. Matt. 28.19.20.

35

36

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

perfection so great within which there is found in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: infinity in the Eternal, the form in the Image, and the use in the Gift. 2 ( 2) The guilt of the heretics and blasphemers compels us to undertake what is unlawful, to scale arduous heights, to speak of the ineffable, and to trespass upon forbidden places. And since by faith alone we should fulfill what is commanded, namely, to adore the Father, to venerate the Son with Him, and to abound in the Holy Spirit, we are forced to raise our lowly words to subjects which cannot be described. By the guilt of another we are forced into guilt, so that what should have been restricted to the pious contemplation of our minds is now exposed to the dangers of human speech. (3) Many have appeared who understood the simplicity of the heavenly words in an arbitrary manner and not according to the evident meaning of the truth itself, interpreting them in a sense which the force of the words did not warrant. Heresy does not come from Scripture, but from the understanding of it; the fault is in the mind, not in the words. Is it possible to falsify the truth? When the name father is heard, is not the nature of the son contained in the name? Will He not be the Holy Spirit who has been so designated? For, there cannot but be in the Father what a father is, nor can the Son be wanting in what a son is, nor can there not be in the Holy Spirit what is received. Iniquitous men confuse and complicate everything and in their distorted minds even seek to effect a change in the nature so that they deprive the Father of what the Father is and take away from the Son what the Son is. They despoil Him, however, 2 St. Augustine, De Trinitate 6.10, praises these names, which distinguish the Persons of the Trinity, as does St. Thomas Aquinas, S. T. III, Q. 39, art. 8. Later writers would restrict the word usus to creatures, and fruitio to God the Creator, but St. Hilary applies the word usus even to the Son of God.

BOOK TWO

37

since according to them He is not a son by nature. He does not possess the nature if the one born and the begetter do not have the same properties in themselves. He is not a son whose being is different from and unlike that of the father. In fact, how will he be a father if he has not begotten in the son the substance and nature that belong to him? ( 4) Therefore, although they are unable to make any changes at all in these facts concerning Him, they invent new doctrines and human vagaries so that Sabellius extends the Father into the Son and believes that He must be acknowledged as the Son in name rather than in reality, since the one whom he represents to himself as the Son is also the Father. Thus, Ebion, assuming that the starting point of the Son of God is entirely from Mary, produces not a man from God but a God from man, 3 so that the Virgin did not receive the pre-existing Word of God, that was with God in the beginning, but brought forth flesh through the Word. He says that previously in the Word there was not the nature of the existing only-begotten God, but the utterance of a voice, as some in this present age teach, who cause the form, wisdom, and power of God to arise from nothingness and in time, lest, if the Son is from the Father, God may suffer a loss in the Son, for they are excessively worried that the birth of the Son from Him may weaken the Father. For this reason they wish to help the Father in the creation of the Son by bringing Him forth from non-existing things, in order that the Father may continue within the perfections of His own nature, since nothing has been born from Him. Is it, then, a cause of wonder that these men think differently about the Holy Spirit, they who have been so reckless in creating, changing, and abolishing His Dispenser? Thus, they destroy the true nature of this perfect mystery by 3 Ebion did not believe that Christ was God and then became man, but that He was first a man and then became God.

38

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

devising differences of substances in things that are so common/ since they deny the Father when they rob the Son of what a son is, and reject the Holy Spirit when they do not know His use or His author. Thus, they lead the ignorant into ruin when they emphasize the reasonableness of their teaching, and deceive their hearers while they divest the nature by means of the names, because names cannot take away the nature. I pass over the remaining names which are a danger to man, the Valentinians, the Manichaeans, and the other corrupt men who seize possession of the souls of the unlearned and infect them by the very contact with their manner of life, so that all are victims of the one plague, while the disease of the teachers is poured into the minds of the listeners. ( 5 ) The unbelief of these men, therefore, forces us into a critical and dangerous position, so that we must violate the heavenly command" and speak about such lofty and mysterious subjects. The Lord said that the people were to be baptized 'in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.' The formula of faith is certain, but, in so far as the heretics are concerned, its meaning is wholly uncertain. Accordingly, we must not add anything to the precepts, but must set a limit to their audacity. And because this malevolence, which has been stimulated by the instigation of diabolical deceit, shuns the true nature of the things by the names of the nature, we emphasize the nature of the names. After we have explained the dignity and office of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as we have them in the words, it will be seen that the names do not deceive us about the 4 Here again St. Hilary clearly indicates his belief in the divinity of the Holy Spirit, since he condemns the heretics for seeking to divide the nature that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have in common. 5 According to 2.1 (above), the Lord commanded His Apostles only to preach the Gospel, but the action of the heretics forces him to go beyond this command and investigate the secrets of the divine nature.

BOOK TWO

39

properties of the nature, but the properties are kept within the meaning of their nature by means of the names. I do not know what is in the minds of those who think differently about these things, who falsify the true nature, prefer darkness to light, sever the indivisible, split up the inseparable, and break asunder the imperishable. If for them it is only a trivial matter to tear apart what it perfect, to fix a law for omnipotence, to set limits to the infinite, for me, on the contrary, who answers them, these problems are a source of anxiety, my mind is confused, and my understanding in a daze, but by my words I shall acknowledge not my weakness but my inability to speak. In truth, the resolution to do this is forced upon me in order to hold rashness in check, to take action against error, and to counteract ignorance. I must undertake something that cannot be limited and venture upon something that cannot be comprehended, so that I may speak about God who cannot be accurately defined. He fixed the names of the naturethe Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Whatever is sought over and above this transcends the meaning of words, the limits of perception, and the concepts of the understanding. It may not be expressed, attained, or grasped. The nature of this subject exhausts the meaning of words, an impenetrable light darkens the vision of the mind, and whatever is without limits is beyond the capacity of our power of reasoning. But, owing to the necessity of doing this, we beg pardon of Him who possesses all these attributes, and we shall dare, we shall seek, and we shall speak. In the discussion of a matter so exalted we make only this promise to believe whatever shall be made known. (6) It is the Father from whom everything that exists has been formed. He is in Christ and through Christ the source of all things. Moreover, His being is in Himself and He does not derive what He is from anywhere else, but pos-

40

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

sesses what He is from Himself and in Himself. He is infinite because He Himself is not in anything and all things are within Him; He is always outside of space because He is not restricted; He is always before time because time comes from Him. Stir up your understanding if you believe that anything is the ultimate limit for Him. You will always find Him, because, while you are always seeking after it, there is always some object present after which you can seek. Thus, it is always characteristic of you to seek after His place as it is for Him to be without any limits. Language will weary itself in speaking about Him, but He will not be encompassed. Again, reflect upon the periods of time; you will find that He always is, and, when the numerals in your statement have finally come to an end, the eternal being of God does not come to an end. Arouse your understanding and seek to comprehend the totality of God in your mind; you hold on to nothing. This totality of God has always something over and above your power of comprehension, but this something over and above always belongs to the totality of God. Therefore, neither this totality, which lacks something over and above, nor this something, that is over and above, includes everything that the totality of God does. What is over and above your power of comprehension is only a part, but everything means the totality of God. But, God is also present everywhere and is present in His entirety wherever He is. Thus, He transcends the realm of understanding, outside of whom nothing exists and of whom eternal being is always characteristic. This is the true nature of the mystery of God; this is the name of the impenetrable nature in the Father. God is invisible, ineffable, infinite. In speaking of Him, even speech is silent; the mind becomes weary in trying to fathom Him; the understanding is limited in comprehending Him. He possesses, indeed, as we have said, the name of His

BOOK TWO

41

nature in the Father, but He is only the Father. He does not receive His Fatherhood in a human way from anywhere else. 6 He Himself is unborn, eternal, and always possesses in Himself what He is. He is known to the Son alone, because no one knows the Father except the Son and he to whom the Son wills to reveal it, nor does anyone know the Son except the Father. Between them there is a mutual knowledge and again between them there is perfect cognition. And, because no one knows the Father except the Son, let us keep before our mind the Father together with the Son who reveals Him and who alone is a reliable witness. ( 7 ) I would rather think of these things about the Father than speak of them, for I am not unaware that all language is powerless to express what must be said. Moreover, in regard to what He is in Himself, that He is invisible, incomprehensible, and immortal, in these words there is admittedly an encomium of His majesty, an intimation of our thoughts, and a sort of definition of our meaning, but speech will surrender to the nature and words do not portray the subject as it is. When you hear that He ~ 'in Himself,' this statement does not strike human reason as free from ambiguity, for there is a distinction between possession and the object of possession, and that which is will be one thing, and that in which it is will be another thing; similarly if you learn that He is 'from Himself,' for no one is Himself both the giver and the gift. If [you learn] that He is immortal, then there is something which does not come from Him to which He is not made subject by His nature, nor is that the only thing that is claimed by this word; 7 if that He is incom6 God is the Father by His very nature, whereas among men human nature and fatherhood are not synonymous terms. 7 The obscurity of this passage arises from the discrepancies in the manuscripts to which Coustant calls attention. According to him, it means that the Father, being immortal by nature, is not subject to death. Now, if death does not pertain to God, then it is outside of God, and exists independently of Him.

42

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

prehensible, He will be nowhere because He cannot be contacted; if that He is invisible, then He Himself is lacking in that which does not appear before our vision. Consequently, a confession in name is defective. No matter what kind of language is used, it will be unable to speak of God as He is and what He is. The perfection of learning is to know God in such a manner that, although you realize He is not unknown, you perceive that He cannot be described. We must believe in Him, understand Him, adore Him, and by such actions we shall make Him known. ( 8 ) We have been led from the unsheltered places near the stormy ocean out into the high seas, and, although we can neither return nor go forward without danger, the journey that we are to follow offers more difficulty than that which we have already completed. The Father is as He is and must be believed to be what He is. My soul i~ filled with consternation upon arriving at the Son and all my words tremble at revealing themselves. He is the offspring of the unbegotten, the one from the one, the true from the true, the living from the living, the perfect from the perfect, the. power of power, the wisdom of wisdom, the glory of glory, the image of the invisible God, the form of the unbegotten Father. How shall we represent to ourselves the birth of the onlybegotten from the unbegotten? The Father often declares from heaven: 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.'8 This is not a separation or a division, for He who has begotten is immutable and He who is born is the image of the invisible God and testifies: 'Because the Father is in Me and I in the Father.'9 There is no adoption, for He is the true Son of God and exclaims: 'He who sees me, sees also the Father.'lo He did not come into being as others do by a 8 Matt. 3.17. 9 John 10.38. 10 John 14.9.

BOOK TWO

43

command, for the Only-begotten is from one and has life in Himself, as He who begot Him has life in Himself, for He declares: 'As the Father has life in Himself, even so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself.'ll Neither is there a part of the Father in the Son, for He affirms: 'All things that the Father has are minc,'12 and again: 'All mine are thine and thine are mine,'13 and: 'Whatever the Father has He has given to the Son,'14 and the Apostle also bears witness: 'For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.'15 Nor does the fullness of being belong to that which is a part. He is the perfect one from the perfect one, but He who has all has given all. And we must not imagine that He did not give, because He has, or that He does not have, because He has given. (9) Both possess, therefore, the secret of this birth. And if someone perhaps will blame his own understanding for being unable to grasp the mystery of this birth, since both the Father and the Son are clearly known, he will learn with even greater sorrow that I am ignorant of it. I do not know, I do not seek, and still I am at peace. The Archangels have not fathomed it, the Angels have not heard it, the Generations ha ve not grasped it, the Prophet has not preached it, the Apostle did not ask about it, and the Son did not reveal it. Let the mournful laments cease! Whoever you are that will inquire into these things, I do not summon you to the heights, I do strive for expansion, I cl.o not lead you into the depths. Will you not bear calmly your ignorance of the birth of the Creator, since you do not know the origin of the creature? This at least I want to know: Do you believe that you are born, and do you understand II 12 13 14 15

Cf. John 5.26. John 16.15. John 17.10. The nearest approach to these words is the text of John 3.35. Col. 2.9.

44

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

what has been begotten from you? 1 do not inquire whence you drew your consciousness, or where you obtained life, or from what place you received your understanding, or what is the nature of smell, touch, sight, and hearing. Certainly, no one is unaware of what he is doing. 1 ask how you will pass on these things to those to whom you will give birth? How will you insert the ideas, light up their eyes, and attach their heart? Describe these processes if you can. Hence, you possess what you do not know and bestow what you do not understand. You are unperturbed about your lack of knowledge in matters concerning yourself and are arrogant in the affairs of God. (10) For this reason, pay attention to the unbegotten Father, listen to the only-begotten Son: 'The Father is greater than 1.'16 Hear: 'I and the Father are one';17 hear: 'He who sees me sees also the Father' ;18 hear: 'The Father is in me and 1 in the Father.'19 Hear: 'I came forth from the Father,'20 and 'He who is in the bosom of the Father,'21 and 'All things that the Father has He has delivered to the Son,'20 and 'The Son has life in Himself, as the Father also has life in Himself.'21 Hear about the Son, the image, the wisdom, the power, and the glory of God, and understand the Holy Spirit who declares: 'Who shall proclaim his generation?'22 And criticize the Lord as He testifies: 'No one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and him to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.'23 Force yourself into this secret, and amid the one unbegotten God and the one only-begotten God immerse yourself in the 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

John 14.28. John 10.30. John 14.9. John 10.38. John 16.28. John 1.18. Isa. 53.8. Matt. 11.27.

BOOK TWO

45

mystery of the inconceivable birth. Begin, go forward, persevere. Even though I know that you will never reach your goal, I will congratulate you for having gone ahead. Whoever seeks after infinite things with a pious mind, although he never overtakes them, will still advance by pressing forward. Your power of comprehension comes to a standstill at this boundary line of the words. 24 ( 11 ) The Son is from that Father who is, the onlybegotten from the unbegotten, the offspring from the parent, the living one from the living one. As the Father has life in Himself, so the Son has been given life in Himself. The perfect one from the perfect one, because the whole one from the whole one. There is no division or dissection, because the fullness of the Godhead is in the Son. The incomprehensible one from the incomprehensible one, for only they themselves know each other mutually. The invisible one from the invisible one, because He is the image of the invisible God and because He who sees the Son sees also the Father. One is from the other because they are the Father and the Son. The nature of the Godhead is not different in one and in the other, because both are one. God is from God, the one onlybegotten God is from the one unbegotten God. There are not two gods, but one from one. There are not two unbegotten gods, because He is born from Him who is unborn. The one is from the other and is not different in anything, because the life of the living one is in the living one. We have touched upon these facts concerning the nature of the divinity, not in order to assemble in on~ place the sum total of our knowledge, but in order to make us realize that what we are discussing cannot be comprehended. You declare that faith serves no purpose if there is nothing that 24 Our human mind. illumined by faith. can go only so far as the words. that is. it can know that there is a true Father and a true Son in the one God. but it cannot comprehend the manner of this divine birth.

46

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

can be comprehended. On the contrary, faith proclaims that this is its purpose: to know that it cannot comprehend that for which it is seeking. ( 12) Something still remains to be said about this unutterable birth; in fact, the something that still remains is everything. I am restless, hesitant, listless, at a loss as to where to begin. I do not know when the Son was born, and it is wrong for me to be ignorant of the fact that He was born. To whom shall I appeal? Whom shall I implore? From what books shall I borrow words to explain such difficult mysteries? Shall I consult all the scholars of Greece? But I have read: 'Where is the "wise man?" . . . Where is the disputant of this world?'25 In this matter the wise and the prudent are dumb, for they have rejected the wisdom of God. Shall I seek for advice from the scribe of the Law? But he does not know, because the cross of Christ is a scandal to him. Shall I, perhaps, advise you to take no notice of and be silent about all these questions, because we pay sufficient reverence to Him when we declare that by Him the lepers were cleansed, the deaf heard, the lame walked, the paralytics stood up, the blind obtained the light, the man blind from the womb received his sight, the devils were put to flight, the sick were restored to health, and the dead rose again? The heretics acknowledge these things, and they are lost. ( 13 ) Hence, do not look for something which would be inferior to the lame walking, the blind seeing, the devils taking to flight, and the dead coming back to life. In solving these difficult questions that I have just mentioned I am aided by the poor fisherman who stands at my side. He is unknown, unlearned, a fishing line in his hands; his clothes are drenched; he is oblivious to the mud beneath his feet; he is in every respect a sailor. Inquire and understand whether 25 1 Cor. 1.20.

BOOK TWO

47

it was more wonderful to raise up the dead than to instruct an uneducated man in the knowledge of this doctrine. He said: 'In the beginning was the Word.'26 What is the meaning of the phrase 'in the beginning was?' The periods of time are passed by, the centuries are omitted, and the ages are laid aside. Think of any beginning that you please, you cannot contain Him in time for at the beginning of the period of which you are thinking He already 'was.' Gaze upon the world; study what has been written about it. 'In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth.'27 What is created, therefore, is made in the beginning and it is contained in time because it is included in the beginning in order that it might be made. 28 My illiterate and unlearned fisherman, however, is not subject to time; he is independent of the centuries; he has raised himself above every beginning, for that which is 'was,' and it is not included in any time so that it would have to begin, because He was rather than was made 'in the beginning.' ( 14) Perhaps we shall discover that our fisherman has deviated from the order of procedure that we have proposed. He has liberated the Word from time and it belongs to itself and lives for itself because it is free, solitary, and subject to no one. Let us listen to the other words. He says: 'And the Word was with God.'29 He was already with God without a beginning who was before a beginning. He who was therefore is 'with God,' and He for whom a conceivable time is wanting is not wanting in a begetter. Our fisherman has escaped, but perhaps he will become confused in other matters. (15) You will say: 'The Word is an utterance of a voice, an announcement of what is to be done, a communication 26 John 1.1. 27 Cf. Gen. 1.1. 28 What was made in the beginning has its origin in time, not what was in the beginning. 29 John 1.1.

48

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

of thoughts. This was with God and was in the beginning. The expression of the thought is eternal, since he who thinks is eternal.'30 For the present I shall answer you in a few words in behalf of my fisherman, until we shall see how he defends his lack of culture. A word by its nature has the possibility of being, but the consequence of being uttered is that it shall not be; in fact, it is only when it is heard. And how was that 'in the beginning' which is not before time nor after time? I do not know whether it can even be in time itself, for the speakers' word is not heard before they speak and it will not be when they have spoken; hut, when they conclude the very subject that they are discussing, that with which they began will no longer be. These things are spoken by me as one of the ordinary people. But the fisherman speaks in his own defence after a different fashion. First of all, he will reprove you for your carelessness in listening to him. For, even if as an uneducated hearer you did not retain the first statement, 'In the beginning was the Word,' why do you complain of what follows: 'And the Word was with God?' Did you hear 'in God' (and not 'with God') in order to conceive it as the utterance of a concealed thought? That which was in the beginning is said to be not in another but with another. But, I make no claims from the preceding statements; let those that follow be their own defence. Bear in mind what the Word is and what it is called: 'And the Word was God.' There is an end to the utterance of a voice and the expression of a thought. This Word is a thing, not a sound; a nature, not a word; God, not a voice. ( 16) Still, I tremble at saying it and the unusual language startles me. I to whom the Prophets have announced the one God hear: 'And the Word was God.' But, in order that my agitation may continue no longer, explain to me, my fisherman, the method for reconciling so exalted a mys30 This was the teaching of Ebion.

BOOK TWO

49

tery and lead all things back to the one God without degrading them, without destroying them, without subjecting them to time. He says: 'This was in the beginning with God.' Since 'this was in the beginning,' it is not included in time; since it is 'God,' it is not associated with a voice; since it is 'with God,' no insult is offered and nothing is taken away. Not only is it not annihilated into something else, but we proclaim it as being with the one unbegotten God from which it itself is the one only-begotten God. (17) 0 fisherman, we are still awaiting the full explanation of the Word from you. It was, it is true, in the beginning, but it could possibly be that it was not before the beginning. Here, also, I offer something to support my fisherman. Regarding that which was, it was impossible for it not to have been, for that which 'was' is incompatible with a time when it was not. What does he say in his own defence? 'All things were made through Him.' If, therefore, there is nothing without Him through whom all things began, He, also, is in eternity through whom everything that is has been made. Time is a fixed measure of extension that exists not in space but in duration. Since everything is from Him, there is nothing that is not from Him; therefore, time is from Him. (18) But, my fisherman, someone says to you: 'In this instance you are too superficial and indiscriminate.' 'All things' were made by Him does not have any limitation. There is the unbegotten God who was made by no one, and He Himself has been born from the unbegotten. 'All things' admits of no exception and allows nothing over and above that is outside of itself. While we do not dare to say anything further, or perhaps, while we are preparing our reply, you meet them with: 'And without Him was made nothing that has been made.' You have indicated the Author while you acknowledged His companion. Since there is 'nothing without Him,' I realize that He is not alone. There is one through

50

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

whom and another without whom. By these two expressions a distinction is drawn between the one who intervenes and the one who performs. ( 19) I was worried about the Author who is the only unbegotten one, lest from the words 'all things' that you used nothing might be excluded. But, you have relieved my fears by declaring: 'And without Him was made nothing.' Still, I am embarrassed and troubled by the fact that 'without Him was made nothing.' Is there something made by someone else, therefore, but which was not made without Him? And if something was made by another, although not without Him, then all things were not made by Him, for it is one thing to have made something, it is another thing to have come to the help of the oJ)e making it. My fisherman, I have no opinion of my own that I can offer in this case as I did in the others. I must immediately reply in your own words: 'All things were made through Him.' I understand, for the Apostle has taught: 'Things visible and things invisible, whether Thrones, or Dominations, or Principalities, or Powers. All things through Him and unto Him.'31 (20) Since, therefore, 'All things were made through Him,' come to my help and describe what was not made without Him! 'What was made in Him is the life.'32 Hence, what was made in Him was not made without Him, for that which was made in Him was also made through Him. All things were created through Him and in Him. But, they were created in Him because God the Creator was born. It also follows from this that nothing was made without Him that was made in Him, because the begotten God was the life, and He who was the life was not made the life after He was born, for in Him there is not one thing which was born 31 Cf. Col. 1.16.

32 Cf. John 1.4.

BOOK TWO

51

and another thing which He received when He was born. There is no intervening time between birth and growth. None of those things which were made in Him was made without Him, because He is the life in whom they were made, and the God who was born from God appeared as God in His birth, not after He was born. He who is born is the living from the living, the true from the true, the perfect from the perfect, and He was not born helpless in His birth, that is to say, He did not become aware of His birth only later on, but recognized Himself as God by the very fact that He was born from God. This, the only begotten from the unbegotten; this: 'I and the Father are one';33 this, the one God in the confession of the Father and the Son; this, the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father. Hence: 'He who sees me sees also the Father.'34 Hence: 'All things that the Father has he has given to the Son.' 35 Hence: 'As the Father has life in himself, even so has he given to the Son to have life in himself.'36 Hence: 'No one knows the Son except the Father; nor the Father except the Son.'37 Hence: 'In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.'38 ( 21 ) This life is the light of men, this light which illuminates the darkness. And to offer us some consolation because, according to the Prophet, it is impossible to describe this birth, the fisherman adds: 'And the darkness grasped it not.'39 Language has surrendered to the nature and has no means of escape; still, the fisherman, who rested on the Lord's bosom, acquired this knowledge. This is not the language of the world, because the subject which it discusses 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

John 10.30. John 14.9. John 16.15. Cf. John 5.26. Matt. 11.27. Col. 2.9. John 1.4.

52

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

is not of this world. If more can be found in the meaning

of the words than that which has already been mentioned, let it be displayed; if there are any other names for the nature that we have explained, let them be produced. And if there are none, in truth because there are none, let us admire the doctrine of the fisherman and let us cling to and adore the confession of the Father and the Son, the unbegotten and the only-begotten, that cannot be expressed and that transcends the entire scope of our language and thought. According to the example of John, let us rest on the bosom of the Lord Jesus in order that we may be able to apprehend and to express these truths. (22) The authority of the Gospels, the teaching of the Apostles, as well as the useless duplicity of the vociferous heretics on all sides, are a recommendation for the integrity of this faith. This foundation stands firm and immovable against all the winds, rains, and torrents, and will not be overturned by the storms, or penetrated by the drops of rain, or washed away by the floods. And the best thing of all is that which has been attacked by so many can be demolished by no one. But, as certain kinds of medicine are so prepared that they are useful not only for specific ailments but to heal all of them together and are in themselves a powerful help for all of them, so in like manner the Catholic faith provides an efficacious remedy for everything, not only .against individual maladies, but against every form of sickness. It is not weakened by their nature, nor overcome by their number, nor deceived by their variety, but it stands erect, one and the same against each one and all of them together. It is truly marvellous that this one contains as many antidotes as there are diseases, and just as many true doctrines as there are false speculations. Let all the names of the heretics be drawn together, and

BOOK TWO

53

let all their followers step forward, and let them hear of the one unbegotten God the Father and the one only-begotten God the Son, the perfect offspring of the perfect Father, that He was not born as the result of a diminution, nor is He a part that has been cut off from the whole, nor brought into being by a derivation or emanation, but born from all things and in all things from Him who does not cease to be in all things in which He is. He is independent of time and not subject to the ages, for He could not be in those ages that He Himself has called into being. This is our Catholic and apostolic profession of faith which is based upon the Gospels. (23) If he dares, let Sabellius proclaim the Father and the Son as one and the same, and that they who are designated as two are the very same person, so that, according to him, the two are one person and not one nature. He will at once hear from the Gospels, not once or twice, but frequently: 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.'40 He will hear: 'The Father is greater than 1.'41 He will hear: 'I go to the Father.'-l2 He will hear: 'Father, I give thee thanks'-l3 and 'Father, glorify me'44 and 'Thou are the Son of the living God.'45 Let Ebion creep near, who concedes the origin of the Son of God from Mary, and recognizes the Word from the day that He assumed our flesh. Let him read again: 'Father, glorify me with thyself, with the glory that I had with thee before the world existed,'46 and: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God. . . . All things were made through him,'47 and: 'He was in the world and the world was made 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Matt. John John John John Matt. John John

17.5. 14.28. 14.12. llAI. 17.5. 16.17. 17.5. 1.l·3.

54

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

through him, and the world knew him not.'48 Let the preachers of the new apostolate now arise, who come from Anti-Christ and who mock the Son of God by every kind of insult, and let them hear: 'I came forth from the Father,'4t and 'The Son in the bosom of the Father,'50 and 'I and the Father are one,'51 and: 'I in the Father and the Father in me.'52 Finally, let them in company with the Jews rage against Christ, who made Himself equal to God by declaring that God was His own Father, and together with them they will hear: 'Or believe my works, because the Father in me and I in the Father.'53 This is, therefore, the one immovable foundation, this is the one blessed rock of faith which confessed through the mouth of Peter: 'Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.'54 This contains in itself arguments just as powerful in favor of the truth as those advanced by the sophistries of the heretical doctrines and the false accusations of infidelity. (24) The will of the Father in the economy of the Redemption is now seen in other occurrences. The Virgin, the birth and the body, and later the cross, death, and hell are our salvation. The Son of God is born of the Virgin and the Holy Spirit55 for the sake of the human race, and in this work He rendered service to Himself. And by His own power, namely, the overshadowing power of God, He planted the origin of His body and decreed the beginning of His 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

John 1.10. John 16.28. Cf. John 1.18. John 10.30. John 14.11. John 14.20,12. Matt. 16.17. Here, as in other places in De Trinitate (e.g., 9.15; 10.22), St. Hilary applies the term Holy Spirit to the Second rather than to the Third Person of the Trinity in the work of the Incarnation. But in his Tractatus mysteriorum 1.1, the saint seems to refer explicitly to the work of the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity, in enabling the Son of God to assume human flesh. Cf. Brisson op. cit. 75.

BOOK TWO

55

flesh in order that He might receive the nature of our flesh from the Virgin when He became man, and through this commingling and fellowship the body of the entire human race might be sanctified in Him,56 in order that, as He willed that all should be included in Him through that which was corporeal, so He Himself would again pass over into all through the invisible part of Him. Accordingly, the image of the invisible God did not reject the shame of a human origin, and endured all the humiliations of our nature in His conception, birth, crying, and cradle. ( 25 ) How shall we make a fitting recompense for so great a condescension? The one only-begotten God, born of God in an unutterable manner, is enclosed in the form of a tiny human body in the womb of the Virgin and grows in size. He who contains all things and in whom and through whom all things come into existence is brought forth according to the law of human birth, and He at whose voice the archangels tremble and the heavens, earth, and all the elements of this world dissolve is heard in the cries of infancy. He who is invisible and incomprehensible and is not to be judged according to sight, feeling, and touch is covered up in a cradle. If anyone consider these things unbefitting a God, then he will have to acknowledge that his indebtedness for such generosity is all the greater, the less suitable they are for the majesty of God. It was not necessary for Him through whom man was made to become man, but it was necessary for us that God become flesh and dwell among us, that is, to dwell within all flesh by the assumption of one flesh. His abasement is our glory. What He is, while appearing in the flesh, that we have in turn become: restored unto God from the flesh. 56 These words do not mean that the Verbum assumed human nature in all of us. From the context it is clear that St. Hilary is referring to the fact that the Son of God has glorified all mankind by selecting a specific human nature as His dwelling place.

56

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

(26) But, lest the faint-hearted perhaps be scandalized at the cradle, the weeping, the birth, and the conception, each of these must be shown as suitable to the dignity of God, so that the display of power precedes the voluntary humiliation, and lowliness is not wanting in majesty. Let us, therefore, glance at the events attendant upon the conception. An angel speaks to Zachary; one who is sterile gives birth; the priest goes forth dumb from the place of incense; John, while still concealed in his mother's womb, begins to speak; the angel blesses Mary and promises that a virgin will be the Mother of the Son of God. She, conscious of her virginity, is puzzled about the manner in which this difficulty can be solved. The angel explains how this divine work will be accomplished, for he declares: 'The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee.'57 The Holy Spirit, coming from above, has sanctified the Virgin's womb and, breathing upon it (for the Spirit breathes where He wills), has become intermingled with our human flesh, and by His power and strength has assumed that which was alien to Him. And, in order that the weakness of the human body might not appear as something contradictory, the power of the Most High overshadowed the Virgin, and strengthened her weakness as if a shadow were cast about her, in order that the overshadowing of the divine power might prepare her bodily substance for the procreative activity of the Spirit who enters into her. This is the dignity of the conception. (27) Let us observe the honor that comes after the birth, the crying, and the cradle. The angel tells Joseph that the virgin is about to bring forth a child and that He who is to be born was to be called Emmanuel, that is, God with us. The Spirit proclaims it through the Prophet; the angel 57 Luke 1.35.

BOOK TWO

57

is a witness; He who is born is God with us. The new light of a star in the sky appears to the Magi and a heavenly sign follows the Lord of heaven. An angel makes known to the shepherds the birth of Christ the Lord, the Salvation of mankind. A multitude of the heavenly army comes together to glorify the birth, and the praise bestowed upon so exalted a work betrays the joy of the court of heaven. Then there is announced the glory of God in heaven and peace on earth to men of good will. The Magi now appear and adore the child wrapped in swaddling-clothes and after the mysterious offering of their vain science genuflect before the cradle. Thus the Magi adore the lowliness of the crib, thus the divine exultation of the angels pays honor to the weeping, thus the Spirit through the Prophet foretells the birth, the angels announce it, and the star with the new light is at its service. In this manner the Holy Spirit coming from above and the overshadowing power of the Most High arrange the begining of the birth. One thing is comprehended; another is seen; one thing is observed by the eyes; another, by the soul. The Virgin begets; the birth comes from God. The infant weeps; the praise of the angel is heard. The swaddling-clothes are humiliating; God is adored. Thus the majesty of omnipotence is not lost when the lowliness of the flesh is assumed. (28) The remainder of His life follows a similar pattern. During the whole period that He lived as man He performed the deeds of God. There is no time to mention the particular events. In all the miracles and cures of various kinds one thing only must be kept in mind: in the assumption of His flesh He appears as man, but in His deeds as God. ( 29 ) Concerning the Holy Spirit, we should neither be silent nor should we speak. But we cannot remain silent because of those who do not know Him. It is not necessary, however, to speak about Him in whom we must believe to-

58

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

gether with the Father and the Son who begot Him. 58 Indeed, in my opinion there should not be any discussion about whether He is. He is, since as a matter of fact He is given, accepted, and obtained, and He, whom in our profession we must join with the Father and the Son, cannot be separated in such a profession from the Father and the Son. To us, the whole is imperfect if something is missing from it. 59 If anyone will seek for an understanding of the manner in which we arrive at this knowledge, the two of us will read in the Apostle: 'And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father' ;60 and again: 'Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God in whom you are sealed' ;61 and again: 'Now we have not received the spirit of the world but the spirit that is from God that we may know the H1ings that have been given to us by God' ;62 and again: 'You, however, are not carnal but spiritual, if indp.ed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him' ;63 and again: 'But if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, then he who raised Christ from the dead will also bring to life your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who dwells in yoU.'64 Therefore, because He is, He is given and possessed and belongs to God. Let the words of the calumniators cease! When they say through whom is He, or what is His purpose, or what kind of a nature does He have, and our answer displeases them when we say 58 St. Thomas Aquinas. S. T. III. Q. 36. art. 4. thus explains these words of St. Hilary: 'we can say that the Father and the Son are two [Persons) spirating by reason of the plurality of subjects. but not two spira tors by reason of the one spiration: 59 Since we must join the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. and since the whole is imperfect if something is missing from it. the Holy Spirit is equally God with the Father and the Son. 60 Gal. 4.6. 61 Eph. 4.30. 62 I Cor. 2.12. 63 Rom. 8.9. 64- Rom. 8.11.

BOOK TWO

59

that He is the one through whom are all things, and from whom are all things, that He is the Spirit of God, the Gift given to the faithful, then the Apostles and the Prophets, who only say of Him that He is, will also offend them, and, moreover, the Father and the Son will also arouse their indignation. ( 30) I believe, indeed, that certain people remain in ignorance and doubt because they see this third one, that is, the one called the Holy Spirit, often referred to as the Father and the Son. In this there is nothing contradictory, since, whether we speak of the Father or the Son, each is a spirit and each is holy. ( 31 ) In regard to what we read in the Gospels: 'Because God is Spirit,'65 we must carefully examine in what manner and for what reason they were uttered. There is a motive for every statement that is made and we shall grasp its meaning when we understand the purpose for which the words were spoken, in order that, because the Lord replied 'God is Spirit,' there may not be a denial of the use and the gift together with the name of the Holy Spirit. The Lord spoke to the Samaritan woman because the redemption of all had come. After a long discourse about the living water, her five husbands and the present one who was not her husband, the woman replied: 'Sir, I see that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that at Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.' The Lord answered: 'Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also seeks such to worship him. God is Spirit, and 65 John 4.24.

60

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth because God is Spirit.'66 The woman, therefore, mindful of the traditions of her ancestors, believed that God must be adored as Samaria did on the mountain or as Jerusalem did in the Temple, because Samaria, in violation of the Law, had chosen a mountain to worship God, but the Jews had chosen the Temple built by Solomon as the site for worshiping God. Both in their presumption restricted the God, within whom are all things and outside of whom there is nothing capable of containing Him, to the crest of a hill or to the hollow vault of a building. Accordingly, since God is invisible, incomprehensible, and boundless, the Lord said that the time had come when God should not be adored on the mountain or in the Temple, because 'God is Spirit,' and a spirit is neither circumscribed or held fast that is everywhere by the power of its nature, is not absent from any place, and exists in every place in all its fullness. Hence, they are the true worshipers who will adore in the Spirit and in truth. For those, however, who will adore God the Spirit in the Spirit, the one is to render assistance, the other is to be worshiped, because a distinction is made in the worship that each one receives. 67 Because it was said 'God is Spirit,' the name and the gift of the Holy Spirit are not taken away. The reply was addressed to the woman who confined God to a temple and a mountain, that all things are in God and God in Himself, and He who is invisible and incomprehensible must be adored in that which is invisible and incomprehensible. Thus, the nature of the gift and the adoration were 66 John 4.19-24. 67 These words seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit, who 'is to render assistance' is inferior to God who is to be worshiped, but, since St. Hilary had already indicated the equality of the three divine Persons, this means that the Holy Spirit is inferior to God the Father in the sense that He proceeds from Him.

BOOK TWO

61

indicated when He taught that God the Spirit must be adored in the Spirit, while He shows both the liberty and knowledge of the adorers as well as the infinity of the one to be adored, since God the Spirit is adored in the Spirit. ( 32 ) There is also a similarity between this text and those words of the Apostle: 'Because the Lord is the spirit; but where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.'68 He drew this distinction in order to emphasize the idea of Him who is, from Him of whom He is. To possess and to be possessed is not the same thing, nor do the words 'who is' and 'of whom He is' have the same meaning. Thus, when he says: 'The Lord is the spirit,' he reveals the nature of His infinity; when he adds: 'where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom,' he indicates Him from whom He is, because the Lord is also the Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom. We have mentioned these things not because the case requires it, but that there might not be any obscurity about them. There is one Holy Spirit everywhere who enlightens all the Patriarchs, the Prophets, and the entire assembly of the Law, who inspired John even in his mother's womb, and was then given to the Apostles and to the other believers that they might understand the truth that had been bestowed upon them. (33) But, let us now hear from the Lord's own words the service that He renders to us. He says: 'Many things yet I have to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.'69 'It is expedient for you that I depart. If I do go I shall send the Advocate to yoU.'70 And again: 'And I will ask the Father and he will send you another Advocate to dwell with you forever, the Spirit of truth.'71 'He will direct you in all the truth. He will not speak on his own authority, but what68 69 70 71

Cf. 2 Cor. 3.17. John 16.12. Cf. John 16.7. Cf. John 14.16,17.

62

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

ever he will hear he will speak, and the things that are to come he will declare to you. He will glorify me, because he will receive of what is mine.'72 These words, which we have borrowed from many places, were spoken to prepare the road for our understanding, and in them are included the will of the donor, as well as the character of and the requisites for the gift, in order that the' gift of the Holy Spirit, which is, as it were, the pledge of His assistance, might throw light upon the difficult article of our faith, the Incarnation of God, since our human weakness cannot comprehend the Father and the Son. (34) It is logical that we should now hear the Apostle as he also explains the power and function of the gift, for he says: 'For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. Now you have not received again a spirit of bondage so as to be again in fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption, by virtue of which we cry, Abba! Father !'73 And again: 'Because no one speaking in the Spirit of God says "Anathema" to Jesus. And no one can say "Lord Jesus" except in the Holy Spirit.'74 And again: 'Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of workings, but the same God, who works all things in all. Now the manifestation of the Spirit is given to everyone for profit. To one through the Spirit is given the utterance of wisdom; and to another the utterance of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; to another faith, in the same Spirit; to another the gift of healing in the one Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another the distinguishing of spirits; to another various kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues. All these things are the work of one and the same 72 Cf. John 16.13,14. 73 Cf. Rom. 8.14. 74 1 Cor. 12.3.

BOOK TWO

63

Spirit.'75 Hence, we have the cause of this gift, we have its effect, and I do not know why there is any ambiguity about it, since its cause, its manner of acting, and its power are clearly determined. ( 35) Let us, therefore, make use of such generous gifts, and, above all, let us strive to exercise this necessary gift. As we have already pointed out, the Apostle declares: 'Now we have received not the spirit of this world but the spirit that is from God, that we may know the things that have been given us by God.'76 Hence, this is received for the sake of knowledge. Just as a faculty of the human body will be idle when the causes that stir it to activity are not present, as the eyes will not perform their functions except through the light or the brightness of day, as the ears will not comprehend their task when no voice or sound is heard, as the nostrils will not be aware of their office if no odor is detected, not that the faculty will be lost because the cause is absent but the employment of the faculty comes from the cause, even so the soul of man, if it has not breathed in the gift of the Spirit through faith, will, it is true, possess the faculty for understanding, but it will not have the light of knowledge. The one gift, which is in Christ, is available to everyone in its entirety, and what is present in every place is given in so far as we desire to receive it, and will remain with us in so far as we desire to merit it. This is with us even to the consummation of the world; this is the consolation of our expectation; this, through the efficacy of the gifts, is the pledge of our future hope; this is the light of the mind, the splendor of the soul. For this reason we must pray for this Holy Spirit; we must strive to merit Him and to retain possession of Him by our belief in and observance of the commandments. 75 1 Cor. 12.4-11. 76 Cf. 1 Cor. 2.12.

BOOK THREE

til

Lord's words obscure when He says: 'I in the Father and the -Father in Me,'l and there is nothing blameworthy in this, for man's natural power of reasoning does not grasp the meaning of this statement. It does not seem possible that the very thing which is in another is at the same time outside of it, and, since those things which we are discussing cannot exist apart from themselves, and, if they are to preserve the number and position in which they are, it seems that they cannot mutually contain each other, so that he who contains something else within himself and remains in this position and always remains outside of it can likewise be always present within him whom he contains within himself. Human knowledge will certainly never grasp these truths and a comparison drawn from human things does not afford any similarity to divine things, but what man cannot conceive is possible to God. In thus expressing myself on this subject I have not meant that, because God has spoken these words, His authority alone suffices to apprehend them. We should examine 2 and seek to realize the significance of this declaration: 'I in the Father and the Father in Me,' provided we ANY PEOPLE FIND THE

,

1 John 14.11. 2 Throughout De Tri!litate St. Hilary first expresses his absolute confidence in God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived, and then examines the words of God in the light of human reason.

65

66

ST. HILARY OF POITlERS

shall grasp it such as it really is, in order that what is regarded as incompatible with the nature of things will be obtained by the wisdom of the divine truth. (2) And that we may penetrate more easily into the knowledge of this most difficult question we must first understand the Father and the Son according to the teaching of the divine Scriptures, in order that, when we have learned to know them and have become familiar with them, our words may become clearer. As we explained in the preceding Book, the eternity of God transcends places, times, appearances, and whatever can be conceived by the human mind. He is outside of all things and within all things; He comprises all things and is comprised by none; He does not change either by increase or decrease, but is invisible, incomprehensible, complete, perfect, and eternal; He does not know anything from elsewhere, but He Himself is sufficient unto Himself to remain what He is. ( 3 ) This unbegotten One, therefore, brought forth the Son from Himself before all time, not from any pre-existing matter, because all things are through the Son; nor from nothing, because the Son is from Him; nor as an ordinary birth, because there is nothing changeable or empty in God; nor as a part that is divided, cut off, or extended, because God is incapable of suffering and is incorporeal and these things are characteristic of suffering and the flesh, and according to the Apostle: 'In Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.'3 But in an inconceivable and ineffable manner, before all time and ages, He gave birth to the only-begotten God from that which in Him was unbegotten, and through His charity and power He bestowed upon His birth everything that God is, and thus from the unbegotten, perfect, and eternal Father there is the only-begotten, perfect, and eternal Son. But 3 Col. 2.9.

BOOK THREE

67

that which belongs to Him because of the body that He assumed results from the eagerness of His good will for our salvation. For, since He as one born from God is invisible, incorporeal, and inconceivable, He has taken upon Himself as much matter and abasement as we possessed the power to understand, perceive, and comprehend, adapting Himself to our weakness rather than abandoning those things which belonged to His own nature. ( 4 ) He is, therefore, the perfect Son of the perfect Father, the only-begotten offspring of the unbegotten God, who has received everything from Him who possesses everything. He is God from God, Spirit from Spirit, Light from Light, and He proclaims with assurance: 'I in the Father and the Father in Me.' As the Father i~ Spirit, so the Son also is Spirit; as the Father is God, so the Son also is God; as the Father is Light so the Son also is Light. From those things, therefore, which are in the Father are also those things which are in the Son, that is, from the whole Father the whole Son is born; He is not from anywhere else, because nothing was before the Son; He is not from nothingness, because the Son is from God; He is not a God in part only, because the fullness of the Godhead is in the Son, not in some things because He is in all things, but as He willed who could, as He knows who begot Him. 4 Whatever is in the Father is also in the Son; whatever is in the unbegotten is also in the only-begotten, one from the other and both are one substance, not one person, but one is in the other because there is nothing different in either of them. The Father is in the Son because the Son is from Him; the Son in the Father because He is not a Son from anywhere else; the only-begotten is in the unbegotten because the only-begotten is from the unbegotten. Thus, they 4 These words mean that the Father was not forced to bring about the Incarnation of the Son, as the Arians claimed.

68

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

are mutually in each other, because as all things are perfect in the Father, so all things are perfect in the Son. This is the unity in the Father and the Son, this the power, this the charity, this the hope, this the faith, this the truth, the way, and the life, not to spread false reports about God concerning His attributes, nor to disparage the Son because of the mystery and power of His birth, not to place anything on an equality with the unbegotten Father, nor to separate the only-begotten from Him in time or power, but to acknowledge Him as the Son of God because He is from God. ( 5 ) There are powers in God of such a nature that, even when the manner in which they are done is incomprehensible to the human mind, our faith does not make any objections because of the evidence of what was done. We shall find this to be true not only in spiritual matters but in material matters as well, where something is shown not to give us an example of the birth but to arouse our admiration for a deed that can be perceived. On the wedding day in Galilee, wine was made from water. Will our language and power of reasoning be able to ascertain how this nature was changed so that the insipidity of water disappeared and the taste of wine originated? This was not a mixture but a creation, and a creation which did not begin from itself but emerged from one thing into another. That which was weaker was not the result of the pouring out of something stronger, but that which was comes to an end, and that which was not comes into being. The bridegroom is sad, the family is embarrassed, the celebration of the wedding banquet is endangered. Jesus is requested to help; He does not rise or come nearer, but while at rest completes the work. Water is poured into the vessels, wine is drawn out from the cups. The knowledge of the one who pours does not agree with that perceived by the one who draws. Those who pour imagine that water is being drawn,

BOOK THREE

69

and those who draw believe that wine was poured. The time which intervenes is not sufficient for a liquid nature to arise and disappear. The manner in which this came about baffles the sight and the understanding, but the power of God is realized in what was done. (6) In regard to the five loaves, we also admire a similar deed. By this increase the hunger of 5,000 men and innumerable women and children is satisfied. The insight into this miracle eludes the eyes of our mind. Five loaves were offered and broken, and what I may call created fragments slip from the hands of those who are breaking them. It does not become smaller when it is broken; nevertheless, the hand of the one who is breaking it is always filled with pieces. The movements deceive your sight. While you are watching one hand filled with pieces of bread, you see an unbroken portion in the other hand. Meanwhile, the number of pieces is increasing. Those who break the bread are serving, while those who eat it are occupied. The hungry are filled; the remains fill twelve baskets. Neither the mind nor the sight can follow the progress of so conspicuous an operation. There is what was not; something is seen which is not understood. It only remains for us to believe that all things are possible to God. ( 7 ) There is no cajolery, therefore, in divine things, nor does God make any pretence at pleasing or deceiving us. These miracles of the Son of God were not performed from any motive of ostentation, for He whom the countless thousands and thousands of angels serve has not flattered man. What possessions of ours does He require through whom we have received everything that belongs to us? Does He seek our congratulations, we who are now in a stupor from sleep, now weary after the night's revelry, now with a guilty conscience after the quarrels and bloodshed of the day, now inebriated after the banquets, whom the Archangels, the

70

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

Dominations, the Principalities and the Powers of heaven, without sleep, without interruption, without guilt praise in their eternal and untiring voices? They acclaim Him because He, the invisible image of God, has created all of them in Himself, has made the generations, has strengthened the heavens, has formed the abyss, and then, when He Himself was born as man, He conquered death, broke the gates of hell, gained the people as co-heirs with Himself, and brought our flesh from corruption into eternal glory. He was not lacking, therefore, in anything that we could offer so that these ineffable and inconceivable miracles should pay honor to Him in our midst as if He were in need of praise. Since God foresaw the aberrations of human iniquity and folly, and since He knew that infidelity would even go so far as to claim for itself the judgment over divine things, He has triumphed over our rashness by the examples of those things which would not be called into question. (8) There are many wise people of the world whose wisdom is folly before God, who, when they hear that God was born from God, the true from the true, the perfect from the perfect, the one from the one, contradict us as if we were teaching something that is impossible. They cling to certain conclusions from their own reasoning when they argue thus: 'Nothing could be born from one, because every birth comes from two. Now, if the Son is born from one, He received a a part of Him who begot Him, and, if a part, then neither is perfect, for something is missing from Him from whom He went forth, nor will there be any fullness in Him who is composed of a part. Therefore, neither is perfect, since He who begot loses His fullness and He who is born does not obtain it.' God, foreseeing this wisdom of the world, thus condemns it through His Prophet, when He declares: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and will reject the understanding of

BOOK THREE

71

their prudent men.'5 He says the same thing through His Apostle: 'Where is the "wise man?" Where is the scribe? Where is the disputant of this world? Did not God make foolish the "wisdom" of this world? Since, in God's wisdom, the world did not come to know God by "wisdom," it pleased God, by the foolishness of our preaching, to save those who believe. The Jews ask for signs, and the Greeks look for "wisdom"; but we, for our part, preach a crucified Christto the Jews indeed a stumbling-block and to the Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God. The foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.'6 ( 9 ) Since the Son of God, therefore, had charge of the human race, He became man first of all in order that He might be believed, in order that as one of ourselves He might be a witness for us concerning the things of God, and in the weakness of our human flesh might proclaim God as His Father to us frail and carnal mortals, while at the same time He fulfills the will of God the Father, as He declares: 'For I have come down from heaven not to do my own wiIl, but the wiIl of him who sent me,'7 not that He does not also will what He does, but He manifests His obedience in carrying out the wiIl of His Father, while He Himself wills to fulfiIl the will of His Father. Similarly, it was this will of fulfilling to which He bears testimony in the words: 'Father, the hour has come! Glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee, even as thou hast given him power over all flesh, in order that to all thou hast given him he may give everlasting life. Now this is everlasting life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ. 5 Isa. 29.14. 6 Cf. I Cor. 1.20·25. 7 John 6.38.

72

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

I have glorified thee on earth, since I have accomplished the work that thou hast given me to do. And now do thou, Father, glorify me with thyself, with the glory that I had with thee before the world existed. I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou hast given me.'8 In these brief and few words He has explained the whole task entrusted to Him and the plan of salvation; nevertheless He has guarded the true nature of the faith against every prompting of diabolical deceit. Let us run hurriedly through the meaning of each phrase in this statement. ( 10) He says: 'Father, the hour has come! Glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee.' He does not say the day or the time, but the hour has come. An hour is a portion of the day. And what will this hour be? That one, namely, to which He referred when He consoled His disciples at the time of His Passion: 'Behold, the hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified.'9 Hence, this is the hour wherein He prays that He may be glorified by the Father as He Himself glorifies the Father. What does this mean? Does He await His own glorification who is about to give glory and to render honor, and will He be in need of what He will in turn bestow? Let the sophists of the world and the wise men of Greece come together and inveigle the truth by their syllogisms! Let them ask how, whence, and why this comes about, and while they hesitate let them hear: 'Because the foolish things of the world has God chosen.' Therefore, by our folly we understand these things that are incomprehensible to the wise ones of the world. The Lord has said: 'Father, the hour has come.' He revealed the hour of the Passion, for He was speaking about it at that moment, and then added: 'Glorify thy Son.' But how was the Son to be glorified? For, He was born of the Virgin and has come from the cradle 8 John 17.1-6_ 9 John 12.23.

BOOK THREE

73

and infancy to perfect manhood. He has lived as man by sleep, hunger, thirst, weariness, tears, and even now was to be spit upon, to be scourged, and crucified. And why? These things were to vindicate only the manhood of Christ. We do not experience the shame of the cross, we are not condemned beforehand by the scourges, we are not defiled by the spittle. The Father glorifies the Son. How? He is finally nailed to the cross. Then what follows? The sun does not set, but hides itself. Why do I say hides itself? It was not taken into a cloud, but failed to complete its ordinary course, and together with the other elements of the world shared in the experience of His death. In order that none of the heavenly works might be present at this crime, they escaped from the necessity of such co-operation by what may be called their self-extinction. What did the earth do? It trembled at the burden of the Lord hanging on a tree, and testified that it would not receive within itself the one who was about to die. Do not the rocks and the stones also refuse to take part? But they break asunder, fall apart, and lose their nature, and acknowledge that the tomb, hewn out of stone, cannot contain the body that is to be buried in it. ( 11 ) What happens after these incidents? The centurion in charge of the cohort and the guardian of the cross cries out: 'Truly he was the Son of God.'lo The creature is liberated by the mediation of this atonement; the rocks do not retain their firmness and strength. Those who had nailed Him to the cross avow that He is truly the Son of God. The result agrees with His assertion. The Lord had said: 'Glorify thy Son.' He testified that He is the Son not only in name but also in the true meaning of the word, wherefore it is said 'thy.' Many of us are the sons of God, but not such as this Son. He is the true and the proper Son, by origin, not by adoption; in truth, not in name; by birth, not by creation. 10 Matt. 27.54.

74

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

Accordingly, after His glorification, the confession of the true nature followed. The centurion acknowledged Him as the Son of God in order that none of the believers might doubt what a man from among the persecutors had not denied. ( 12) Perhaps we believe that the Son requires the glorification for which He prayed, and will be deemed weak while awaiting His glorification from one who is stronger. And who will not admit that the Father is superior as the one unbegotten to the one begotten, as the father to the son, as the one who sends to the one who is sent, as the one who wills to the one who obeys? He Himself is a witness for us: 'The Father is greater than I.'11 These things are to be understood in the manner that they are, but we must be on our guard lest the honor paid to the Father weaken the glory that it due to the Son. Nor is this glorification itself which He requests compatible with weakness, for the words 'Father, glorify thy Son' are also followed by 'that thy Son may glorify thee.' The Son is certainly not weak who, although He must receive glory, shall in His turn confer glory. If He is not weak, for what reason does he offer such a prayer? No one asks except for something that he needs. Or is the Father also weak? Or has He been so lavish in squandering His possessions that the Son must render glory to Him? But this one was not in want of it, and that one does not have any need of it, yet each will bestow glory upon the other. Therefore, the petition for the glory that is to be mutally given and returned does not take away anything from the Father nor does it weaken the Son, but it reveals the same power of the divinity in both of them since the Son prays that He be II John 14.28. Modern interpreters refer these words to the superiority of the Father over Christ as the God-Man. But St. Hilary, in common with other early Fathers of the Church, applied them to the superiority of the divine nature of the Father over that of the Son. This superiority proceeds not from any inequality of nature, but from their respective origins. The Father is unborn, while the Son is born from the Father_

BOOK THREE

75

glorified by the Father and the Father does not disdain the glorification by the Son. These things show rather the unity of the Godhead in the Father and the Son by the glory which they give and receive in turn. (13) We must now study the nature of this glorification and whence it comes. I believe that God is unchangeable and that neither defect or improvement nor gain or loss affect His eternity, but what He is He always is, for this is peculiar to God. That which always is will never have anything in its nature that is compatible with non-being. How, therefore, will He be glbrified, since His nature has all that it needs and no decline has set in within Him so that He may not receive anything in Himself nor take back anything that He has lost? We are embarrassed and we hesitate. The Evangelist does not leave the weakness of our understanding in a quandary, for he shows the glory that the Son will render to the Father when he says: 'Even as thou hast given him power over all flesh, in order that to all thou hast given him he may give everlasting life. Now this is everlasting life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.'12 The glory which the Father receives from the Son consists in this, that He must be perceived by us. The glory was this, that the Son, who had become incarnate, received power from Him over all flesh because He would bestow eternal life upon those who had fallen from grace, who were corporeal, and who were subject to death. Eternal life for us was not the result of an act but of a power, since the glory of eternity is acquired not by a new atonement but by the recognition of God alone. Therefore, the glory of God is not increased, for He has not suffered a loss so that there should be an increase. Through the Son, He is glorified in the midst of us, who are ignorant, fugitives, sinners, hopelessly dead, and sur12 John 17.2,3.

76

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

rounded by lawless darkness. And He is glorified by this, that the Son has received from Him the power over all flesh to which He will give everlasting life. Hence, these words of the Son glorify the Father. As a consequence, when the Son received everything, He was glorified by the Father; on the other hand, the Father is glorified when all things are done through the Son. The glory that has been received is returned in such a manner that whatever glory the Son possesses belongs completely to the glory of the Father, because He has received everything from the Father. The honor paid to the servant tends to the honor of Him who sent him, as the honor of the begetter redounds to the honor of the begotten. ( 14) Finally, he tells us in what eternal life consists: 'that they may know thee, the only true God and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.' What difficult questions arise here and what is the nature of the contradiction in terms? It is life to know the true God, but this in itself does not obtain life. What is, therefore, connected with it? 'And him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.' The Son renders the honor that is due to the Father when He says: 'thee, the only true God.' The Son, however, does not disassociate Himself from the true nature of God, since He adds: 'And him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.' The faithful in their profession of faith make no discrimination, since the hope of obtaining life rests upon both of them, nor is the true God wanting to Him who is immediately joined to Him. Accordingly, when it is stated: 'that they may know thee, the only true God and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ,' by this designation, that is, of the sender and the one sent, the true nature and divinity of the Father and the Son is not differentiated by any kind of a distinction, either in name or in time,13 but our God-fearing faith is taught to acknowledge the begetter and the begotten. 13 The name of the one sent is immediately connected with that of the one who sent him. Hence, the Father and Son are not separated in time.

BOOK THREE

77

(15) Therefore, the Son clearly glorifies the Father in that which follows: 'I have glorified thee on earth, since I have accomplished the work that thou hast given me to do.'14 The praise of the Father comes entirely from the Son, because those things for which the Son will be acclaimed will be a commendation of the Father. He fulfills everything that the Father has willed. The Son of God is born as man, but the power of God is manifested at His birth from the Virgin. The Son of God is seen as man, but appears as God in the works of man. The Son of God is nailed to the cross, but on the cross God overcomes the death of man. Christ, the Son of God, dies, but all flesh is vivified in Christ. The Son of God goes to limbo, and man is brought back to heaven. The more such things are praised in Christ, the greater will be the approbation of Him from whom Christ as God derives His origin. By such means as these, therefore, does the Father glorify the Son on earth, and, again, the Son by the miracles of His power gives glory to Him from whom He comes in the sight of the ignorant pagans and the foolish world. And this interchange of glory is certainly not concerned with an increase in the divine nature, but with the honor that He received from those who did not know Him. Of what did not the Father possess an abundance, He from whom everything comes? Or what was wanting to the Son in whom, as it pleased Him, all the fullness of the Godhead dwelt? Consequently, the Father is glorified on earth because the work which He commanded is accomplished. ( 16) Let us see the glory that the Son expects from the Father and this discussion is concluded. In the sentences that follow it is stated: 'I have glorified thee on earth, since I have accomplished the work that thou hast given me to do. And now do thou, Father, glorify me with thyself, with the glory that I had with thee before the world existed. I have 14 Cf. John 17.4.

78

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

manifested thy name to the men whom thou hast given me.'l. Therefore, the Father has been glorified by the miracles of the Son when He is recognized as God, when He is revealed as the Father of the only-begotten, when for our salvation He even willed that His Son be born as man from the Virgin, and in Him all those things, which began with the birth from the Virgin, are accomplished in the Passion. Consequently, because the Son of God, perfect in every part that He possesses, and born before all time with the fullness of the Godhead, and, now become man according to the origin of His flesh, was approaching His consummation in death, He prays that He may be glorified with God as He was glorifying Him on earth, for at that time the powers of God were being glorified in the flesh before a world that did not know Him. Now, what is the nature of the glory that He expects with the Father? It is that, of course, which He had with Him before the world was made. He had the fullness of the Godhead and still has it, for He is the Son of God. He who was the Son of God also began to be the Son of man, for the Word was made flesh. He did not lose what He was, but began to be what He was not. He did not cease to possess His own nature, but received what was ours. He prays that what He had assumed might derive profit from that glory of His which He had never lost. Therefore, since the Son is the Word and the Word was made flesh, and the Word was God and this was in the beginning with God, and the Word was the Son before the foundation of the world, the Son now made flesh prayed that the flesh might begin to be to the Father what the Word was, in order that what belonged in time might receive the splendor of His glory which is timeless, in order that when the corruption of the flesh was transformed it might be assimilated into the power of God and the incorruptibility of the Spirit. Hence, this is the prayer of 15 John 17.5.

BOOK THREE

79

God, this the profession of the Son to the Father, this the petition of the flesh in which all will see Him on the day of judgment and which they will recognize from the wounds and the cross, in which He was prefigured on the mount, in which He ascended into heaven, in which He sits at the right hand of God, in which He was seen by Paul, in which He was honored by Stephen. ( 17) Accordingly, after the name of the Father has been made known, he asks these questions: But under what name? Was the name of God ignored? Moses heard it from the bush; Genesis proclaimed it at the beginning of the creation of the world; the Law explained this; the Prophets made it known; men perceived it in these works of the world; even the pagans by their lies venerated it. The name of God, therefore, was not unknown. Yet, it was completely unknown. No one knows God unless he confesses the Father as also the Father of the only-begotten Son, and the Son originating not as a part, or an extension, or an emanation, but born from Him in an ineffable and inconceivable manner, as this Son from a Father who possesses the fullness of the Godhead from which and in which He was born, as the true, infinite, and perfect God, for this is the fullness of God. If any of these things is wanting, there will not be the fullness which, according to His pleasure, should dwell in Him. This is proclaimed by the Son, this is revealed to the ignorant. Thus, the Father is glorified by the Son when the Father of the Son is recognized as such. ( 18) The Son of God, wishing to strengthen our faith in His birth, placed before us the example of His miracles, in order that by the indescribable manner in which His unutterable deeds were performed we would be taught about the power of the inconceivable birth, when water is made wine, and when five loaves of bread satisfy 5,000 men, not including others of the opposite sex and of a different age

80

ST. HILARY OF POlTlERS

group, and fill twelve baskets with the fragments. The incident is seen and is unknown; it is done and it is not understood; the manner is not apprehended and the result is evident. It is foolish to raise an unwarranted objection in an inquiry when the subject under investigation cannot by its very nature be comprehended. For, as the Father is inexplicable by the fact that He is unborn, so the Son cannot be described because He is the only-begotten, since He who is born is the image of the unborn. When we conceive an image in our mind and words, we must also include in it the one of whom He is the image. But we are pursuing invisible things, and we are venturing upon incomprehensible things, we whose understanding is restricted to visible and material objects. We do not blush at our folly, we do not plead guilty to impiety, when we criticize the mysteries of God and the powers of God. We make inquiries about how He is the Son, whence He is the Son, or whether He has been born with any loss to the Father or from any portion of the Father. The evidence you have had in His works should have caused you to believe that God can do things, although you cannot understand His manner of doing them. ( 19) You seek to know how Christ was born according to the Spirit and I ask you about material things. I do not inquire how He was born of the Virgin, but whether her flesh, begetting a perfect flesh from herself, suffered any loss in herself. Indeed, she did not receive that which she bore and her flesh brought forth flesh without any blemish from the ordinary process of birth, and she brought forth from herself Him who was perfect, although her own integrity was not impaired. 16 And it would doubtless be proper to hold 16 The saint here takes for granted the perfect virginity of Mary. He argues from it that, just as she brought forth her son without any loss of her integrity, so Christ was born without any loss to the nature of His Father.

BOOK THREE

81

that a thing is not impossible with God that is done by His power in a human creature. (20) But I ask you, whoever you are, as an investigator of incomprehensible things and an eminent judge of the divine secrets and power, to give at least an explanation of the following fact to an unlearned person like myself who only believes all the things about God as God has revealed them. I hear the Lord, and because I put my trust in those things that are written, I know that after His resurrection He often allowed Himself to be seen in the body by many who did not believe in Him, to Thomas certainly who would not be convinced except by touching His wounds, as he declares: 'Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.'17 The Lord adapts Himself to all the weaknesses of our understanding and, to put an end to the doubt of the unbelieving, He performs a mystery of His invisible power. 0 examiner of heavenly things, whoever you are, describe for me the manner in which this was done. The Apostles were behind closed doors and had secretly come together after the Lord's Passion. The Lord appears before Thomas in order to strengthen his faith by fulfilling the proposed conditions. He granted him permission to feel His flesh and to touch His wounds. Unquestionably, He whose wounds were to be recognized must have offered a body that was pierced. I want to find out, therefore, through what parts of the closed doors did He enter with his bodily form. The Evangelist particularly emphasized this when he said: 'Jesus came, the doors being closed, and stood in their midst.'18 Did he force himself through the structure of the walls and the solid woodwork and slip through the material which by its nature is impene17 John 20.25. 18 John 20.26.

82

ST. HILARY OF POlTIERS

trable? He stood before them with a real body, not an apparent one or a deceitful imitation. Let the eyes of your soul follow the admission of Him who passes through, and let your intellectual vision enter the closed room with Him. Everything is locked and bolted, but He stands in their midst, He who by His power can penetrate all things. You find fault with invisible things and I demand an explanation for those that are visible. The solid mass does not give way, nor is it in accordance with the natural quality of wood and stone to admit anything as if it were falling apart in an imperceptible manner. The body of the Lord does not depart from Him that He may assume it again from nothing, and whence does He come into their midst who is present before them? In such questions our reason and language are powerless and the true nature of the fact is beyond human comprehension. Consequently, if we are guilty of misrepresentation in regard to the birth, we lie likewise about the entrance of the Lord. Let us grant that the deed was not done, because we do not apprehend how it was done, and that, since our understanding of it has reached its limit, the effects resulting from the deed have reached their limit. Our certainty about the deed has triumphed over our untruthfulness. The Lord stood in the closed house before His disciples, and the Son is born from the Father. Do not deny that He stood there because by the weakness of your intelligence you do not grasp the manner in which the one standing there made His entry. Do not remain in ignorance of the fact that from the unbegotten and perfect God the only-begotten and perfect Son was born because the power of the birth transcends the concepts and the language of our human nature. (21 ) And, furthermore, all the works of the world could be cited as witnesses about the unlawfulness of doubting the actions and the power of God. But our infidelity dashes

BOOK THREE

83

against the truth itself, and we rush headlong to destroy the power of God. Were it possible, we would lift up our bodies and hands to heaven, we would upset the sun and the other stars in the annual movements within their orbit, we would disturb the ebb and flow of the ocean, we would also forbid the flowing of the fountains, we would reverse the natural course of the rivers, we would shake the foundations of the earth, and we would rage with murderous fury against these works of God. Fortunately, the nature of our bodies restricts us within these necessary limits of moderation. Assuredly, we do not disguise what we would do if it were possible. In the insolence of our sacrilegious will, we desire to distort the nature of truth and we declare war against the works of God, because these are things that lie within our power. (22) The Son said: 'Father, I have manifested thy name to the men.' Why are we scrupulous about these things? Why are we perplexed? Do you deny the Father? But, this was the greatest achievement of the Son, that we might know the Father. Evidently, you deny Him, since, according to you, the Son was not born from Him. Why should He be called the Son, if He was made like others according to the will? I can admire God, the Creator of Christ, the maker of the world, and it is a deed worthy of God that He has produced the author of the archangels and angels, of things visible and invisible, of heaven and earth and of this whole creation. The Lord does not labor for this purpose, to teach you that God can create all things, but to inform you that God is the Father of the Son who is speaking. In heaven there are many powers, both mighty and eternal, but there is one only-begotten Son, who does not differ from the others in power alone,19 because all things were made through Him. Because He is the true and the 19 This was one of the assertions of the Arians.

84

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

only Son, let Him not be robbed of His origin, so that He is born from nothing. You ht;ar of the Son; believe that He is the Son. You hear of the Father; remember that He is a Father. Why do you break in upon these names with your suspicion, ill-will, and impudence? Names are applied to divine things in accordance with the concept of their nature. Why do you do violence to the true meaning of the words? You hear the words 'Father' and 'Son.' Do not doubt that they are what they are named. The essence of the doctrine revealed by the Son is that you should know the Father. Why do you frustrate the work of the Prophets, the Incarnation of the Word, the birth from the Virgin, the power of His works, the cross of Christ? All these things were bestowed on you, offered for you, in order to make the Father and the Son known to you. You now substitute the will, the creation, and the adoption. Examine the warfare and the campaign of Christ. Truly does He cry out: 'Father, I have manifested thy name to the men.' You do not hear: 'You have created the creator of heavenly things.' You do not hear: 'You have called the maker of earthly things into being.' But you hear:· 'Father, I have manifested thy name to the men.' Use the gift of the Saviour. Realize that He is the Father who begot, and that He is the Son who was born, born with a true nature from that Father who is. Remember that it was revealed to you not that the Father is God but that God is the Father. (23) You hear: 'I and the Father are one.'20 Why do you separate and divide the Son from the Father? They are one, that is to say, He who is has nothing that will not also be found in Him from whom He is. When you hear the Son declare: 'I and the Father are one,' apply this statement to the persons, and allow to the begetter and the begotten the truth that has been revealed concerning them. They are one 20 John 10.30.

BOOK THREE

85

as are he who begets and he who is begotten. Why do you exclude the nature? Why do you suppress the truth? You hear: 'The Father in me and I in the Father,'21 and the works of the Son bear testimony to this declaration about the Father and the Son. In our concept, we do not represent Him as a body in a body, or as the pouring of water into wine, but we acknowledge the same similarity of power and the fullness of the divinity in each of them. The Son received everything from the Father, and He is the form of God and the image of His substance. The 'image of His substance' merely distinguishes Him from the one who is, in order that we may believe in His existence and not that we may also assume that there is a dissimilarity of nature. For the Father to be in the Son and the Son in the Father means that there is a perfect fullness of the Godhead in each of them. The Son is not a diminution of the Father nor is He an imperfect Son from the Father. An image is not alone and the likeness is not to itself. Nothing can be like God unless it is from Him. That which is similar in everything does not originate from somewhere else, and the similarity of the one to the other does not allow them to be joined together by anything contradictory. Do not change similar things and do not separate things that are not distinct from each other! He who said: 'Let us make mankind in our image and likeness' reveals that mutual similarity between them from the fact that He uses the phrase 'our likeness.' Do not touch, do not handle, do not destroy! Hold fast to the names of the nature, hold fast to the revelation concerning the Son! It is not my wish that you flatter, that you praise the Son with your own words. It will be sufficient if you are content with what is written. (24) We must not, however, rely upon human wisdom to such a degree as to believe that what we understand we 21 John 10.38.

86

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

understand perfectly, and to imagine that the contents of our knowledge is absolutely perfect when, after examining it ourselves in our own mind, we conclude that in every respect it rests upon a satisfactory concept of the truth. That which is imperfect cannot form an idea of that which is perfect, nor can that which derives its existence from something else have a perfect understanding either of its author or of itself. Indeed, it knows itself only in that which it is, because its concepts do not extend beyond the limits which have been assigned to it by its nature. It is indebted for its activity not to itself but to its maker, and, therefore, that which depends upon something else for its being because it has been created is imperfect, since its existence comes from outside itself. And in those matters, where it believes itself to be perfectly wise, it must be foolish, for, when it disregards the insurmountable barriers of its nature and thinks that everything can be encompassed within the limits of its own helplessness, at that moment it glories in that which is erroneously given the name of wisdom. It cannot be wise beyond the capacity of its own power of comprehension, and just as it lacks the power to subsist by itself, so it is limited in the range of its ideas. Therefore, the substitution of an imperfect nature,22 that boasts of possessing the wisdom of a perfect nature, is derided and scorned as a foolish wisdom, for the Apostle says: 'For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with the wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ be made void. For the doctrine of the cross is foolishness to those who perish, but to those who are saved it is the power of God, for it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and the prudence of the prudent I will reject." Where is the "wise man?" Where is the scribe? Where is the disputant 22 'The substitution of an imperfect nature' is a metonymy for 'man' and implies his mental limitations. Cf. R. Kinnavey, The Vocabulary of St. Hilary of Poitiers 262-3_

BOOK THREE

87

of this world? Did not God make foolish the wisdom of this world? Since, in God's wisdom, the world did not come to know God by "wisdom," it pleased God by the foolishness of our preaching to save those who believe. The Jews ask for signs and the Greeks look for "wisdom"; but we, for our part, preach a crucified Christ Jesus-to the Jews indeed a stumbling block and to the Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.'23 All unbelief, consequently, is folly because it employs the wisdom of its imperfect understanding and measures everything according to the standard of its impotence, and concludes that nothing can be performed which it does not comprehend. The origin of unbelief proceeds from a verdict of its infirmity, while it does not believe that anything can be done which it decides cannot be done. (25) Hence, the Apostle, realizing that our defective manner of reasoning regarded only that as true which it understood, declared that he would not preach in the language of wisdom, lest the doctrine that he taught appear as vain. And, in order that he might not be considered as a preacher of folly, he added that the word of the cross is foolishness to those who perish, because the unbelievers regard as prudence only that which they understand. Since they grasped nothing except that which is within the nature of their own infirmity, they consider the only perfect wisdom of God to be fony, and thereby become foolish by this very decision of their own helpless wisdom. Therefore, what is folly for those who perish is the power of God for those who are saved, because they do not measure anything by the weakness of their natural understanding, but judge the activity of the divine omnipotence according to 23 Cf. 1 Cor. 1.17-25.

88

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

the unlimited power of heaven. And for this reason God rejects the wisdom of the wise and the prudence of the learned, because by the recognition of human folly salvation is granted to those who believe, and, while the unbelievers regard as foolish whatever is beyond their comprehension, the faithful submit to God's power and strength in the mysterious doctrines whereby their salvation is to be obtained. What comes from God, therefore, is not foolish and the prudence of human nature is ridiculous which demands miracles or wisdom from their God before it will believe. For the Jews it is natural to ask for miracles, because, as a consequence of their familiarity with the Law, they are not altogether ignorant of the name of God and irritated by the scandal of the cross. But for the Greeks it is appropriate to seek for wisdom, because with their Gentile absurdity and human prudence they demand an explanation of why God was raised aloft on a cross. Since this is concealed in a mystery, out of consideration for the mental capacity of our weak nature, folly becomes unbelieving, for, what the mind, naturally imperfect, cannot comprehend by natural reason it rejects as outside the realm of wisdom. Because of this foolish wisdom of the world, which formerly did not recognize God in the wisdom of God, that is, in the splendor of the world and the beauty and orderly arrangement of creation, and did not pay homage to the wisdom of its Creator, it pleased God by the preaching of folly to save those who believe, that is, by faith in the cross to procure eternal life for men, so that the judgment of human knowledge might be put to shame and salvation might be found in that which they considered to be an absurdity. Christ, who is folly to the Gentiles and a scandal to the Jews, is the power of God and the wisdom of God, because what is considered weak and foolish in the things of God from a human viewpoint surpasses

BOOK THREE

89

earthly prudence and might by the genuineness of its wisdom and power. (26) For this reason, nothing in the actions of God is to be treated in accordance with the reasoning of the human mind, nor may the matter of the work itself that has been created pass judgment upon its Creator. We must clothe ourselves with folly in order to acquire wisdom, not by the comprehension of folly, but by the consciousness of our nature, in order that what the wisdom of earthly thinking may not grasp may, on the other hand, become known to us by the wisdom of the divine power. When we realize the idea of our foolishness and have noted the ignorance of the natural foolishness within us, we are then led by the knowledge of divine wisdom to the wisdom of God, since we place no limitations upon the attributes and the power of God, since we do not restrict the Lord of nature within the laws of nature, and since we perceive that this alone is the orthodox belief concerning God, of which He Himself is for Himself and for us both its witness as well as its author.

BOOK FOUR

II

that it is clearly evident from our earlier Books, written some time ago, that our faith in and profession of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are derived from the teachings of the Gospels and the Apostles, and that we hold nothing in common with the heretics, certain facts must be brought together in the following Books that the knowledge of the truth may become clearer after we have pointed out all their fallacies and blasphemous doctrines. We must realize in the first place the rashness that is associated with their beliefs, and the dangers into which their godlessness leads, then the opinions which they hold in opposition to the apostolic faith to which we subscribe, but which they habitually deny, and, finally, how their method of interpretation distorts the true meaning and significance of the divine words. (2) We are conscious of the fact, however, that the language of men or human comparisons cannot offer a satisfactory explanation for the things of God. That whiCh is ineffable surpasses the limits and measure of any kind of a description, and that which is spiritual differs from the nature and analogy of human things. Although our treatise is concerned with heavenly natures, we shall have to speak of those things which lie within the realm of spiritual concepts by employing an ordinary manner of speech, not, of course, L THOUGH WE BELIEVE

~.

91

92

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

because this is suitable to the dignity of God, but because it is necessary in view of the feebleness of our understanding. This is to say, we shall have to speak of what we think and understand in accordance with our own environment and in our own words. As we have already touched upon these matters in Book 1, 1 we are also mentioning them in this place so that no one may believe that we are thinking of God as we do of corporeal natures when we employ human analogies, or that we are placing spiritual matters on the same plane as our bodily sufferings; rather, that we have made use of the outward appearance of visible things in order to throw light upon invisible things. (3) The heretics declare that Christ is not from God, that is, the Son is not born from the Father nor is He God by nature, but by a decree. His adoption appears particularly in His name, because, as there are many sons of God, so He also is the Son of God; hence, their liberality in regard to this dignity, because, as there are many gods, so He also is God. They are inspired, however, by a more tender affection toward His adoption and designation, so that He was adopted before all the others and is greater than all the rest of the adopted sons, and, since He was created in a more excellent way than all the other creatures, He Himself is superior to all the other creatures. There also are some who confess the omnipotence of God and declare that He was created in the likeness of God and, like all other things, was brought into existence from nothing in order to become the image of that eternal Creator; that is to say, a word commanded Him to exist from non-existing things, since an all-powerful God can form a likeness to Himself from nothing. ( 4 ) In fact, when they learn that the bishops of former times have taught that the Father and the Son are of one substance, in order to weaken these words under the subtle I Cf. above, 1.19.

BOOK FOUR

93

pretext of being an heretical opinion they even add the following explanation. They declare that the meaning of this phrase, that is, of one substance, which in Greek is called homoousion/ must be used and expressed in this sense, that He Himself is the Father who is also the Son; in other words, as a consequence of His infinity He has been extended into the Virgin, from whom He assumed flesh and annexed the name Son to Himself in that body which He assumed. This is the first error in regard to homoousion. Their second is to claim that homoousion means that the two of them are in common possession of a pre-existing and different substance, as if this prior substance, or essence of some matter already existing in which both shared and which was consumed by both, offers evidence that both of them belonged to an already existing nature as well as to the one substance. Consequently, they state that we should reject our profession of faith in homoousion because, on the one hand, this expression does not distinguish the Father from the Son, and, on the other hand, it reveals that the Father comes after the matter which He shares in common with the Son. Thirdly, they also allege this reason for their disapproval of homoousion, that, according to their meaning of this phrase, the Son receives His existence from a division of the Father's substance, as if He were cut off from Him so that one thing is divided into two. Therefore, they are said to be of one substance, because the part cut off from the whole possesses that nature in itself from which it has been cut off, yet it is impossible for God to fall into a state of dismemberment, because He would also be changeable if He were subject to a diminution as a result of a division, and He would be made imperfect if the substance of His own perfection went forth from Him into a different portion. 2 In De synodis 81-92. the saint gives a brief history of the word homoomion. He urges the Semi-Arians to use it as that best suited to safeguard the divinity of Christ.

94

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

(5) They also believe themselves capable of contradicting the teaching of the Prophets, and also of the Gospels and Apostles, in such a skillful manner as to proclaim that the Son was born in time. Since they claim that we are wrong in asserting that the Son always was, then, since they exclude the fact that He always was, they must admit that He was born in time. If His being is not eternal, then there will be a time when He was not. And, if there was a time when He was not, then time will be before Him, because He whose being is not eternal begins to be in time. On the other hand, He who is not subject to time cannot but possess the attribute of eternal existence. But, they allege as a reason for rejecting His eternal being that, if He always was, then we must hold that He was not born, just as if we teach that He cannot be born, because He always was. ( 6) 0 foolish and irreverent fears and impious anxiety about God! These meanings, which they attach to and find blameworthy in the expression homoousion J and in the assertion that the Son always was, are abominated, rejected, and condemned by the Church. She knows the one God from whom are all things, and she also knows our one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, the one from whom and the one through whom, the source of everything from the one, the creation of everything through the other. In the one from whom she understands the origin without birth, in the one through whom she venerates the power that does not differ in anything from its origin, since there is a common source of authority between the one from whom and the one through whom, in that which was created and in those things which have been created. She recognizes in the Spirit that God is Spirit, impassible and indivisible, for she has learned from the Lord that a spirit does not have flesh and bones, 3 lest we might possibly believe 3 Cf. Luke 24.39.

BOOK FOUR

95

that He is subject to the laws of bodily suffering. She knows the one unbegotten God, she also knows the one only-begotten Son of God. She asserts that the Father is eternal and not subject to any origin; similarly, she acknowledges the derivation of the Son from the eternal one, not that He Himself has a beginning, but that He is from one who is without a beginning-He does not originate through Himself, but from Him who is from no one and who always is; He is born from one who is eternal; in other words, He receives His birth from the eternity of the Father. Our Faith, therefore, is free from the deformity of heretical error. We have proclaimed our profession of faith, though as yet we have not cited our proofs for it. But, in order to prevent any doubt from arising about the expression homoousion, which the Fathers used, and about our belief that He always was, we have mentioned these things that it may be known that He subsists in the nature in which He was born from the Father, and by the birth of the Son nothing has been taken away from the nature of the Father in which He remained. The saintly men, full of zeal for God's doctrine, have designated the Son as consubstantial with the Father, not because of the errors and reasons that we have already referred to, but in order that no one might believe that the term usia did away with the birth of the only-begotten Son because He was said to be consubstantial with the Father. ( 7 ) In order to realize the necessity for using these two expressions, 4 and to grasp their meaning as the best possible defense of the faith against the raging heretics of those days, I think that we should answer the falsehoods of the heretics and refute their absurd and destructive teachings from the testimonies of the Gospels and Apostles. In their own eyes they appear to offer a reasonable explanation for the individual doctrines which they teach, because they have alleged 4 usia and homootlsia.

96

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

certain passages from the divine books in favor of each of their assertions, but these are distortions of the true meaning, and, in keeping with the perverted minds of the interpreters, offer nothing but the appearance of the truth. (8) After they have magnified only the divinity of the Father, they seek to take away from the Son that He is God, because it is written: 'Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord thy God is one.'5 The Lord says the same thing to the doctor of the Law who asked Him what was the greatest commandment in the Law: 'Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord thy God is one.'6 Again, Paul expresses it in this manner: 'For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men.'7 Then, because He alone is wise, so that no wisdom may be left to the Son according to the words of the Apostle: 'Now to him who is able to strengthen you in accordance with my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept in silence from eternal ages, which is manifested now through the writings of the prophets according to the precept of the eternal God, and made known to all the Gentiles to bring about obedience to faith-to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, to whom be honor forever and ever. Amen.'8 Then, because He is without birth and the only true one, since Isaias has said: 'They shall bless thee, the true God,'9 and because the Lord bore witness to the very same thing in the Gospels when He says: 'Now this is eternal life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.'lo Because He alone is good, so that no goodness may be left to the Son, because He has said: 'No one is good but God 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cf. Dent. 6.4. Mark 12.29. 1 Tim. 2.5. Cf. Rom. 16.25-27. Cf. Isa. 65.16. John 17.3.

BOOK FOUR

97

only.'ll Then, because He alone is mighty, since Paul has declared: 'This coming he in his own time will make manifest, who is the Blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords.'12 Then, because they know this one alone as immutable and unchangeable, because the Prophet has stated: 'I am the Lord your God and I change not,'13 and the Apostle James has proclaimed: 'With whom there is no change.'14 He is the just judge, because it is written: 'God, a just judge, strong and patient.'15 He is the one who cares for all things, because the Lord has uttered the words when He was speaking about the birds: 'And your heavenly father feeds them,'16 and again: 'Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father's leave. But even the hairs of your head are numbered.'17 He foresees everything, as blessed Susanna asserts: '0 eternal God, the one who knowest hidden things, who knowest all things before they come to pass.'18 He cannot be conceived according to what is written: 'Heaven is my throne, but the earth my footstool. What is this house that you will build to me? And what is this place of my rest? My hands made all these things, and all these are mine.'19 He also permeates everything, as Paul testified: 'For in him we live and move and have our being,'20 and the Psalmist asks: 'Whither shall 1 go from thy spirit? Or whither shall 1 flee from thy face? If I ascend into heaven, thou art there: if I descend into hell, thou art present. If 1 take my wings before the light, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Mark 10.18. I Tim. 6.15. Cf. Mal. 3.6. James 1.17. Cf. Ps. 7.12. Cf. Matt. 6.26. Cf. Matt. 10.29. Cf. Dan. 13.42. Cf. Isa. 66.1 2. Acts 17.28.

98

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

for there also shall thy hand lead me: and thy right hand shall hold me.'21 This one is also incorporeal, because it is said: 'For God is spirit, and they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.'22 He is immortal and invisible, as Paul avows: 'Who alone has immortality and dwells in light inaccessible, whom no man has seen nor can see,' 23< and according to the Evangelist: 'No one has at any time seen God, except the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father.'21 He also remains alone and is unborn, because it was stated: 'I AM WHO AM,'25 and again: 'Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel: He who is, hath sent me to you,'26 and by Jeremias: 'Who art the Lord, 0 Lord.'27 (9) Who does not perceive that these interpretations are utterly false and deceptive? Although they are blended and mixed together very ingeniously, they clearly reveal the artificial cunning and absurdity of their malice and stupidity. Among other things, they have added that they recognize the Father alone as unbegotten, as if from this anyone could suppose that He-from whom that one was born through whom are all things--obtained that which He is from someone else. By the very fact that He is called the Father He is shown to be the author of Him whom He begot, because He has a name by which we recognize that He came forth from no one else, and which teaches us that He who was born began to exist from Him who is. Accordingly, in regard to that which is proper to the Father, let us leave as proper to Him and as a secret, while we profess our belief in the unborn power of His eternal 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Cf. Ps, 13S.7-10. John 4.24. Cf. 1 Tim. 6.16. Cf. John US. Exod. 3.14. Ibid. Cf. Jer. 1.6.

BOOK FOUR

99

power. Still, no one doubts, I think, that this is the reason why they declare that certain qualities are personal and exclusive to the Father, when they profess their faith in Him, in order that no one else may be considered as having a share in them. "'hen they say that He alone is true, alone just, alone wise, alone invisible, alone good, alone pO'werful, alone immortal, then in their opinion the fact that He alone possesses these attributes means that the Son is excluded from any share in them. For, as they say, no one else participates in the attributes that are peculiar to Him ..'\.nd if these attributes are in the Father alone, then we must belie\'e that God the Son is false, foolish, a corporeal being composed of visible matter, spiteful, weak, and mortal. He is debarred from all these attributes because no one but the Father possesses them. ( 10) Since we are about to speak of the most perfect majesty and the most complete divinity of the only-begotten Son of God, we do not believe that anyone will conclude from all these words that we employ that our aim is to dishonor God the Father, as if it would lessen His dignity if any of these are ascribed to the Son, for the glory of the Son redounds rather to the glory of the Father, and the author is exalted from whom has sprung one deserving of such honor. The Son has nothing else than birth/ 8 and the tribute of praise which the begotten recei\'es tends to the glory of his begetter. Hence, any supposition of disrespect disappears if our faith teaches that whatever majesty the Son possesses will aid in magnifying the power of Him who begot such a Son. ( 11 ) .'\.fter discovering what they profess about the Father in their attempts to disparage the Son, our next step 28 St. Thomas Aquinas, S, T, I Q, 40 a, 3, in approving these words, 'the Son has nothing else than birth,' concludes: 'if filiation be removed, the Son's hypostasis no longer remains, and the same holds as regards the other Persons.'

100

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

is to listen to their assertions about the Son. Since we shall reply to all of their propositions and shall expose their ungodly doctrine by proofs drawn from the divine Scriptures, we must connect what we have said about the Father with what we shall later mention about the Son, so that, when we have compared our profession of faith about both of them, we may then follow one and the same order in answering each of the doctrines which they have proposed. They claim that the Son of God has not been born from any pre-existing matter, because all things were created through Him, nor is He from God, because nothing can be separated from God, but He belongs to those things which were not, that is, He is the perfect creature of God but not like the other creatures. He is, in truth, a creature, for it is written: 'The Lord created me for the beginning of his ways.'~9 He is also the perfect handiwork, but not like other things that were made; He has been made indeed, but in the manner that St. Paul says to the Hebrew: 'Having been made so much superior to the angels as he possesses a more excellent name than they.'30 And again: 'Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high priest of our confession, Jesus, who is faithful to him who made him.>3l But, in order to weaken His might, power, and divinity, they appeal particularly to His own words: 'The Father is greater than 1.'32 But they admit, therefore, that He is not one of the other creatures, for it is written: 'All things were made through him.'33 For this reason they concentrate all of their godless teachings in that well-known formula of theirs in which they assert. 34 29 30 31 32 33 34

Cf. Provo 8.22. Cf. Heb. 1.4. Heb. 3.1. John 14.28. John 1.3. This formula of faith is contained in a letter, which Arius and his followers wrote to Alexander, Patriarch of Alexandria, before the formal condemnation of their heresy by the Council of Nicaea.

BOOK FOUR

101

(12) 'We know the one God, alone unmade, alone e\'erlasting, alone without a beginning, alone true, alone possessing immortality, alone the best, alone powerful, the Creator of all, the unchangeable, immutable, just, and best regulator and ordainer of the Law, the Prophets, and the New Testament. This God ga\'e birth to the only-begotten Son before all the ages, through whom He also made the world and all things, born not in appearance but in truth, obedient to His will. He is unchangeable and immutable, the perfect creature of God, but not just as one of His creatures; He was the handiwork, but not as the others things that were made. The Son is not, as Yalentinian asserted, an emanation of the Father, nor is the Son, as ~lanichaeus taught, a portion of the one substance of the Father, nor as Sabellius, who divides the union and calls the same one the Son whom he also called the Father, nor, as Hieracas declares, is He a lamp from a lamp, or a torch di\'ided into two parts. 'Nor is He one who pre\'iously was, and then was horn or created anew into the Son, but, as even you yourself, 0 most blessed Father, in the presence of the Church and the council of the brethren have frequently condemned those who introduce such doctrines. But, as we have stated, He was created by the will of God before all times and ages, and has recei\'ed both His life and His being from the Father, and the Father makes His own glorious qualities exist in Him. For the Father, in conferring the inheritance of all things upon Him, has not deprived Himself of those which ha\'e not been made and are still in His possession; He is still the origin of all things. (13) 'Wherefore, there are three substances, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And, truly, God is the cause of all things, completely alone, without a beginning; the Son, however, has been brought forth from the Father without time, and has been created and has been formed before

102

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

the world; still, He was not before He was born, but was born without time before everything, and He alone has the same substance as the Father alone. He is not eternal or co-eternal, nor was He uncreated at the same time with the Father, nor, as certain ones say, does He possess His being at the same time with the Father, or according to some, who advance two unborn principles, but as the oneness or principle of all things, in this manner God is also before all things. Therefore, He is likewise before the Son, as we have also learned from you when you taught publicly in the church. 'In so far as God confers upon Him His being, His glory, His life, and everything that has been given to Him, in so far God is His principle. But, He is His principle, that is to say, His God, since He is before Him. For, if the expressions "from Him" and "from the womb'" and "I came forth from the Father and have come," are understood as if He were a part of this one substance, and as if He were the extension of an emanation, then, according to them, the Father would be a composite being, divisible and changeable, and a body, and, in so far as it depends on them, the God without a body is subject to the limitations of a body.' ( 14) This is their error, this is their fatal teaching! To corroborate it they bring in evidence from the divine words, but with a distorted interpretation of their meaning, and lie about them while they take advantage of human ignorance. No one, it is true, should doubt that we ought to make use of the teachings of God in order to acquire the knowledge of God. By itself, our human weakness will not apprehend heavenly things, nor will the mere knowledge of corporeal things bring with it an understanding of those that are invisible. That which is created or carnal within us, or that which God has given us for the usefulness of human life, cannot by their own perspicacity arrive at the distinction

BOOK FOUR

103

between the nature of their Creator and His work. Our faculties do not rise to the heavenly science nor does our helplessness grasp the incomprehensible power by any kind of knowledge. We must believe God when He speaks about Himself and we must not resist those truths which He has revealed to us for our understanding. We must either deny Him after the manner of the heathens if we reject His proofs or, if we believe Him to be God as He is, then we cannot have any other concept of Him than that which He has revealed about Himself. Let there be an end, therefore, to the personal opinions of men, and do not allow our human judgment to trespass upon the order established by God! For this reason we pursue the godless and impious teachings about God by the very same texts of the divine words, and we shall base everything on the testimony of Him who is the subject of our investigation, and we shall not attempt to deceive or to mislead our unlearned listeners by merely citing some quotations from the texts without explaining all the attendant circumstances. The understanding of the words is to be deduced from the reasons why they were spoken, because the words are subordinated to the event, not the event to the words. But we shall examine everything, while at the same time we shall explain the reasons why they were said and the meaning of the words. We shall reconsider each statement, . therefore, according to the plan that we have drawn up. ( 15 ) This is their central doctrine: 'We know that there is only one God, for Moses has declared: 'Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord thy God is one.'35 Has anyone dared to raise any doubts about this doctrine? Has anyone of those who believe in God been heard to teach anything else except that there is one God, from whom are all things, one power without birth, and this one power without a beginning? But, we can35 Cf. Deut. 6.4.

104

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

not deny that the Son of God is God simply because there is only one God. Moses, or, rather, God through Moses, ordered that this first commandment, to believe in the one God, should be given to the people both in Egypt and in the desert who were addicted to idolatry and to the worship of the pretended deities. This decree was right and fitting, for there is one God from whom are all things. Let us see whether the same Moses also acknowledges the divinity of Him through whom are all things. For, since God is one, nothing is taken away from the Father because the Son is also God. He is God from God, one from one; wherefore, there is one God, because God is from Him. On the other hand, He is not, therefore, less a God because the Father is one God, for He is the only-begotten Son of God; He is not unborn, so that He does not deprive the Father of being the one God, nor is He Himself anything else than God because He was born from God. Although in regard to Him it should not be doubted that He is God by His birth from God, so that, according to our faith there is one God, still, let us see whether Moses who said to Israel: 'The Lord thy God is one' has proclaimed the Son of God as God. In professing our faith in the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall have to refer to the testimony of him upon whose authority the heretics, while acknowledging only the one God, believe that we must deny to the Son that which God is. ( 16) Therefore, since according to the Apostle we profess our faith in God completely and perfectly when we speak in this manner: 'One God the Father from whom are all things, and our one Lord Jesus through whom are all things,'36 let us examine the origin of the world and what Moses says about it. He declares: 'Then God said, "let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let there be a division between the water and the water." And so it was. 36 Cf. 1 Cor. 8.6.

BOOK FOUR

105

God made the firmament, and God divided through the midst of the water.'37 Hence, you have the God from whom and the God through whom. Or, if you will deny this, then you must explain through whom that was made which was made, or at least you must show how the very nature of the things to be created was obedient to God, for, upon hearing the words: 'Let there be a firmament,' it established itself in accordance with the command of God. But the revelation of the divine Scriptures does not allow this explanation. According to the Prophet, everything has been made from nothing,38 and no existing matter has been changed into anything else, but that which was not was created and is complete. Through whom? Listen to the Evangelist: 'All things were made through him.'39 If you ask through whom, you will hear the same Evangelist declaring: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him.'40 And if you wish to deny that the Father has said: 'Let there be a firmament,' you will again hear the same Prophet asserting: 'For he spoke and they were made: he commanded and they were created.'41 Hence, the words that were said, 'Let there be a firmament,' reveal that it was the Father who spoke, but when it was added: 'And so it was,' and when it is said that God made it, we are to understand by this the person of the agent who made it. For, 'he spoke and they were made.' He alone was certainly not the one who willed it and did it. 'He commanded and they were created.' Certainly, it did not come into existence because it pleased Him, so that the function of a mediator between Himself and what was to be created would have been superfluous. Consequently, the God 37 38 39 40 41

Cf. Gen. 1.6,7. Cf. 2 ~[ach. 7.28. John 1.3. John 1.1-3. Ps. HR.5.

106

ST. HILARY OF POITIERS

from whom are all things says that they are to be made, and the God through whom are all things makes them, and the same name is applied equally in the designation of Him who commands and for the work of Him who carries it out. If you will dare to claim that the Son is not referred to when it is stated: 'And God made it,' what will be your attitude to where it is said: 'All things were made through Him,' and those words: 'And our one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,' and that statement: 'He spoke and they were made'? If these divine words will carry conviction to your rash mind, nothing will be taken away from the divinity of the Son of God by the words: 'Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord thy God is one,' since the one who spoke them also proclaims the Son as God at the very creation of the world. Still, let us see what progress we can make from this distinction between the God who commands and the God who performs. Even though it contradicts the concept of our ordinary reasoning to believe that by the words: 'He commanded, and they were made,' is meant a being that is solitary and one and the same person, still, in order that there may not be any ambiguity, we must explain those things that took place after the creation of the world. ( 17) When, therefore, the world was completed and its inhabitant was to be made, the following words are used about him: 'God said: Let us make mankind in our image and likeness,' and again: 'God made man. To the image of God he made him.'42 I now ask whether you believe that 42 Gen. 1.26,27. In his other writings (e.g., Tractatus mysteriorum) St. Hilary regards the persons and events of the Old Testament as foreshadowing the life and the teaching of Christ. Hence, it is only natural that he should look for indications of the central mystery of the Christian religion, the Trinity, in the Old Testament. The passages from the Old Testament upon which he comments in this Book and the following are often interpreted by the early Fathers of the Eastern and Western Church in a similar manner.

BOOK FOUR

107

God spoke to Himself alone, or whether you consider these words as being directed not to Himself but to someone else? If you say to Himself alone, you are refuted by the very voice of Him who declares: 'Let us make mankind- in our image and likeness.' God spoke these words through the lawgiver according to our understanding, that is to say, by means of the words which He Himself wished us to use while He would impart to us the knowledge of what He had done. The Son of God, through whom all things were made, was pointed out by the words that were uttered: 'And God said let there be a firmament,' and again because it was thus expressed: 'And God made the firmament.' But, in order that these words might not be regarded as vain or superfluous if He had said to Himself that it should be, and, again, if He had done it (for there is nothing so incongruous than for one who is alone to tell himself to do something, since an act of the will is all that is required to do it), He wished it to be more clearly understood by expressing it in this manner that it did not refer to Him alone. By declaring: 'Let us make mankind in our image and likeness,' He does away with any idea of isolation, since He reveals this mutual participation. But He Himself who is alone cannot have any kind of companionship for Himself. Again, the words 'let us make' are not compatible with the loneliness of a solitary, nor does anyone address another as 'our' who is a stranger to himself. Both expressions-'let us make' and 'our' --